Tenofovir monotherapy versus tenofovir and entecavir combination therapy in patients with entecavir-resistant chronic hepatitis B with multiple drug failure: results of a randomised trial

The combination of Schisandrin C and Luteolin synergistically attenuates hepatitis B virus infection via repressing HBV replication and promoting cGAS-STING pathway activation in macrophages

BACKGROUND

HBV infection can result in severe liver diseases and is one of the primary causes of liver cell carcinoma-related mortality. Liuwei Wuling tablet (LWWL) is a traditional Chinese medicine formula, with a protecting liver and decreasing enzyme activity, usually used to treat chronic hepatitis B with NAs in clinic. However, its main active ingredients and mechanism of action have not been fully investigated. Hence, we aimed to screen the active ingredient and effective ingredient combinations from Liuwei Wuling tablet to explore the anti-herpatitis B virus activity and mechanism.

METHODS

Analysis and screening of effective antiviral components in LWWL by network pharmacology, luteolin (Lut) may be a compound with significant antiviral activity. The mechanism of antiviral action of Lut was also found by real-time PCR detection and western blotting. Meanwhile, we established a co-culture model to investigate the antiviral mechanism of Schisandrin C (SC), one of the main active components of Schisandra chinensis fructus (the sovereign drug of LWWL). Next, HBV-infected mice were established by tail vein injection of pAAV-HBV1.2 plasmid and administered continuously for 20 days. And their antiviral capacity was evaluated by checking serum levels of HBsAg, HBeAg, levels of HBV DNA, and liver levels of HBcAg.

RESULTS

In this study, we conducted network pharmacology analysis on LWWL, and through in vitro experimental validation and data analysis, we found that luteolin (Lut) possessed obviously anti-HBV activity, inhibiting HBV replication by downregulating hepatocyte nuclear factor 4α (HNF4α) via the ERK pathway. Additionally, we established a co-culture system and proved that SC promoted activation of cGAS-STINIG pathway and IFN-β production in THP-1 cells to inhibit HBV replication in HepG2.2.15 cells. Moreover, we found the combination of SC and Lut shows a greater effect in inhibiting HBV compared to SC or Lut alone in HBV-infected mice.

CONCLUSION

Taken together, our study suggests that combination of SC and Lut may be potential candidate drug for the prevention and treatment of chronic hepatitis B.

Efficacy and safety of tenofovir alafenamide in patients with chronic hepatitis B exhibiting suboptimal response to entecavir

BACKGROUND

Entecavir (ETV) is a potent and safe antiviral agent for patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB); however, some patients may exhibit suboptimal response or resistance to ETV. Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is a novel tenofovir prodrug with improved pharmacokinetics and reduced renal and bone toxicity compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of switching from ETV to TAF in patients with CHB exhibiting suboptimal response to ETV.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients with CHB who had been treated with ETV for at least 12 mo and had persistent or recurrent viremia [Hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA ≥ 20 IU/mL] or partial virologic response (HBV DNA < 20 IU/mL, but detectable) were enrolled in the study. The patients were randomly assigned to either continue ETV (0.5 mg) daily or switch to TAF (25 mg) daily for 48 wk. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved a virologic response (HBV DNA level < 20 IU/mL) at week 48. Secondary endpoints included changes in serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT), hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg), and anti-HBe levels, and renal and bone safety parameters.

RESULTS

At week 48, the proportion of patients who achieved a virologic response was significantly higher in the TAF group than in the ETV group (93.3% vs 66.7%, P = 0.012). The mean reduction in HBV DNA from baseline was also significantly greater in the TAF group than in the ETV group (-3.8 vs -2.4 Log10 IU/mL, P < 0.001). The rates of ALT normalization, HBeAg loss, HBeAg seroconversion, and HBsAg loss were not found to significantly differ between the two groups. None of the patients developed genotypic resistance to ETV or TAF. Both drugs were well tolerated, with no serious adverse events or discontinuations caused by adverse events. No significant changes were observed in the estimated glomerular filtration rate, serum creatinine level, or urine protein-to-creatinine ratio in either group. The TAF group had a significantly lower decrease in bone mineral density at the lumbar spine and hip than the ETV group (-0.8% vs -2.1%, P = 0.004; -0.6% vs -1.8%, P = 0.007, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Switching from ETV to TAF is effective and safe for patients with CHB exhibiting a suboptimal response to ETV and may prevent further viral resistance and reduce renal and bone toxicity.

The role of Traditional Chinese medicine in anti-HBV: background, progress, and challenges

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) remains a major world's most serious public health issues. Despite the remarkable effect of nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) in inhibiting hepatitis B virus (HBV) deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) as the first-line drug, there are several limitations still, such as poor antigen inhibition, drug resistance, low-level viremia, restricting patients' functional cure. Due to the constraints of NAs, traditional medicines, such as traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), have become more prevalently used and researched in the clinical treatment of CHB as complementary alternative therapies. As a consequence, the review focuses on the background based on HBV's life cycle as well as the NAs' limitations, progress based on direct and indirect pathway of targeting HBV of TCM, and challenges of TCM. We found TCMs play an increasingly important role in anti-HBV. In a direct antiviral way, they regulate HBV infection, replication, assembly, and other aspects of the HBV life cycle. As for indirect way, TCMs can exert anti-HBV effects through targeting the host, including immune regulation, apoptosis, autophagy, oxidative stress, etc. Especially, TCMs have the advantages of strong antigenic inhibition compared to NAs. Specifically, we can combine the benefits of TCMs in strong HBV antigen inhibition with the benefits of NAs in targeted antiviral effects, in order to find a suitable combination of "TCM + NAs" to contribute to Chinese knowledge of the realisation of the "global elimination of HBV by 2030" goal of the World Health Organization.

Are the New Nucleos(t)ide Analogs Better than the Old Nucleos(t)ide Analogs?

In treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and tenofovir alafenamide have a minimal or no risk of drug-resistance. These 3 nucleos(t)ide analog agents are highly potent inducing high rate of virologic response (reducing serum HBV DNA to levels undetectable by polymerase chain reaction assays) in most treatment-naïve patients. Our randomized trials have demonstrated that monotherapy with TDF can provide a successful virological response in most of the heavily pretreated patients with multidrug resistance to ETV or adefovir.

Detecting Early Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B Using Longitudinal α-Fetoprotein Screening

BACKGROUND & AIMS

This study aimed to evaluate the parametric empirical Bayes (PEB) longitudinal α-fetoprotein (AFP) screening algorithm performance in patients with hepatitis B compared with AFP surveillance with a fixed threshold.

METHODS

The serum AFP of 588 patients was measured. Patients were screened at least once every 6 months with AFP and ultrasound or computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging. Age, aspartate aminotransferase level, alanine aminotransferase level, platelet count, total bilirubin, prothrombin time, and hepatitis B virus DNA level were adjusted in the PEB algorithm. All variables were abstracted at the time of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) diagnosis for cases or last follow-up for controls and at months -6, -12, -18, -24, -30, -36, -42, -48, and -54, up to month -60.

RESULTS

Overall, 62 (10.5%) HCC cases developed during a median follow-up of 52.7 months. Moreover, 55 (88.7%) cases were detected at Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage 0 or A. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of the patient-level true positive rate against the screening-level false positive rate was significantly higher in the PEB algorithm than that in AFP alone (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve: 0.94 vs 0.86; P < .0005). At 80% specificity, the PEB algorithm significantly improved the patient-level true positive rate within 2 years prior to HCC diagnosis compared with AFP alone (80.6% vs 67.7%, respectively; P = .0485; adjusted P = .1663). The PEB algorithm more effectively enabled first positive screening.

CONCLUSIONS

The longitudinal assessment of AFP by the PEB algorithm improved HCC screening performance compared to AFP alone in patients with hepatitis B. This algorithm may improve HCC screening without additional cost or inconvenience to patients.

Tenofovir Alafenamide for Drug-Resistant Hepatitis B: A Randomized Trial for Switching From Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It remains unknown whether tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) could replace tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in patients with drug-resistant hepatitis B virus (HBV).

METHODS

In this multicenter randomized non-inferiority trial, 174 patients with HBV resistant to multiple drugs (lamivudine, entecavir, and/or adefovir) under TDF monotherapy for ≥96 weeks were randomized 1:1 to switch to TAF (n = 87) or continue TDF (n = 87) for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was proportion of patients with HBV DNA <60 IU/mL at week 48.

RESULTS

At baseline, 84 and 80 patients had HBV DNA <60 IU/mL in the TAF and TDF groups, respectively. At week 48, the proportion of patients with HBV DNA <60 IU/mL was 98.9% (86/87) in TAF group, showing non-inferiority to TDF group (97.7%, 85/87; difference, 1.1%; 95% confidence interval, -2.7% to 5.0%). Changes in median alanine aminotransferase at week 48 from baseline were statistically different between TAF and TDF groups (-3 IU/L vs +2 IU/L; P = .02). TAF group showed a statistically greater increase in bone mineral density at spine (+1.84% vs +0.08%; P = .01) and numerically higher increase in mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (+8.2% vs +4.5%; P = .06) compared with TDF group. Compared with TDF group, TAF group showed significantly greater increases in mean body weight (0.71 vs -0.37 kg; P = .01) and total, low-density lipoprotein, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (P < .001 for all) at week 48 from baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

TAF could be substituted for TDF in patients with multidrug-resistant HBV for improved bone and renal safety without a loss of efficacy. However, increases in body weight and cholesterol levels with TAF treatment would be a concern. ClinicalTrials.gov no.: NCT03241641.

Effectiveness of tenofovir alafenamide for chronic hepatitis B patients with a poor response to the previously used nucleos(t)ide analogs

BACKGROUND

Few studies have demonstrated the potency of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) in patients with poor response to other nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study comprising consecutive 40 patients exhibiting a poor response to other NAs, who subsequently received TAF-containing regimens. The primary outcome was the prevalence of virological response (VR) at each time and maintained virological response (MVR) under TAF-containing regimens until week 96.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, the prevalence of MVR was 71.1% (27/38). Further, poor tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) response was significantly associated with a lower prevalence of MVR (p = 0.014). In TDF-naïve patients, the prevalence of MVR was 92.3% (12/13) and 62.5% (5/8) in patients with lamivudine resistance (LAM-r) and entecavir resistance (ETV-r), respectively. Further, viral load and HBeAg status at baseline were associated with a lower prevalence of MVR (p = 0.013). Among the seven patients with prior TDF exposure, 2 patients achieved MVR. Among them, one patient with development of viral breakthrough during TDF/LAM achieved MVR after switching to TAF/ETV. In contrast, one of the five patients with non-MVR had three substitutions (rtS106C, rtD134N/S, and rtL269I) of quadruple mutations in addition to ETV-r. Other patients with rtA181T + rtN236T also could not achieve MVR.

CONCLUSION

TAF exhibited high antiviral potency in patients with LAM-r and ETV-r. However, TAF potency was associated with previous TDF response, viral load, and HBeAg status at baseline. Additionally, a quadruple mutation may impact tenofovir resistance; however, further studies are needed to verify this.

Guidelines for Prevention and Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B

To achieve the goal of the World Health Organization to eliminate viral hepatitis as a major public health threat by 2030, the Chinese Society of Infectious Diseases and the Chinese Society of Hepatology convened an expert panel in 2019 to update the guidelines for the prevention and treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB). The current guidelines cover recent advances in basic, clinical, and preventive studies of CHB infection and consider the actual situation in China. These guidelines are intended to provide support for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of CHB.

Efficacy of different nucleoside analog rescue therapies for entecavir-resistant chronic hepatitis B patients

BACKGROUND

Entecavir (ETV) is recommended as a first-line anti-HBV treatment. However, many chronic hepatitis B patients initiate anti-HBV treatment such as lamivudine and telbivudine with low genetic barriers in China, which leads to compensatory mutations and increases the rate of ETV resistance. The management of ETV resistance in China is an essential clinical issue.

METHODS

Patients from 2011 to 2017 with nucleos(t)ide analog resistance were screened and 72 patients with ETV resistance were included. These patients received different rescue therapies including an ETV and adefovir (ADV) combination therapy group (n = 25), a tenofovir (TDF) monotherapy group (n = 27), and an ETV and TDF combination therapy group (n = 20). Virologic, biochemical, and serologic responses were compared among the three groups.

RESULTS

The rate of ETV resistance among all HBV-resistant variants increased from 6.04% in 2011 to 15.02% in 2017. TDF monotherapy and TDF combination groups showed similar rates of negative HBV DNA at 48 weeks (74.07% vs 70.00%, P > 0.05), while the ETV and ADV group showed the worst virologic response (28.00%). Also, TDF monotherapy and TDF combination therapy showed similar decline of HBV DNA at weeks 12, 24, and 48. There was no significant difference in the rates of HBeAg clearance, ALT normalization, and abnormal renal function among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TDF monotherapy showed a comparable virologic response to TDF and ETV combination therapy and a better virologic response than ETV and ADV combination therapy. Thus, TDF monotherapy is the preferred rescue therapy for ETV resistance.

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B patients with failure to preceding treatments: A nationwide cohort study

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy is recommended for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients who are refractory to other drugs. Yet, little data are available for the effectiveness of TDF monotherapy compared with TDF-based combination therapy on the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and death/transplantation. This nationwide population-based cohort study included 11,289 CHB patients who initiated TDF rescue therapy after failure of preceding treatments between 2012 and 2014 in Korea. The risks of HCC and death/transplantation were compared between TDF combotherapy (n = 2,499) and TDF monotherapy (n = 8,790) groups. The findings were validated in a hospital cohort of 1,163 CHB patients. In the nationwide cohort, during 44.2 months of overall treatment duration, 529 patients developed HCC and 190 died or received transplantation. In the 2,499 propensity score-matched pairs, compared with TDF combotherapy, TDF monotherapy showed no significantly different risks of HCC (1.11/100 person-year [PY] vs. 1.32/100 PY; HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95-1.60, p = .12) and death/transplant (0.43/100 PY vs. 0.42/100 PY; HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.67-1.60, p = .87). However, in the 469 propensity score-matched pairs of cirrhosis subcohort, TDF monotherapy was associated with a higher risk of HCC than TDF combotherapy (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.002-2.12, p = .049). In the validation hospital cohort, TDF monotherapy was not associated with significantly different risks of HCC and death/transplant in the entire cohort and cirrhosis subcohort. In CHB patients with failure to preceding treatments, TDF monotherapy showed no higher risks of HCC and death/transplantation compared with TDF combotherapy. However, the comparative effectiveness of rescue TDF monotherapy should be further clarified in cirrhotic patients since the findings were not consistent in the nationwide and hospital cohorts.

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.

Long-term efficacy and safety of nucleos(t)ides analogues in patients with chronic hepatitis B

Nucleos(t)ide analogues with high barrier to resistance are regarded as the principal therapeutic option for chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Treatment with entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil (TDF) and the later released tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is highly effective at controlling hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and, in the vast majority of patients, is well tolerated. No significant differences in viral suppression have been described among the different regimens, although an earlier achievement in biochemical response has been suggested first under TDF and recently under TAF. High barrier to resistance NAs rarely achieve hepatitis B surface antigen sero-clearance, and therefore should be maintained life-long in most cases. This has increased concerns about treatment-related toxicity, especially in patients under TDF with additional risk factors for kidney and bone impairment. TAF has shown a better bone and kidney safety profile than TDF, although it is not yet available worldwide due to its higher cost. Emergence of adverse events should be monitored since treatment-switch to ETV/TAF seems to be effective and safe in HBV mono-infected subjects. Finally, although an effective antiviral treatment leads to a clear improvement in clinical outcome of CHB patients; the risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is not completely avoided with viral suppression. Whether tenofovir-based regimens provide any additional benefit over ETV in HCC prevention remains unclear and requires further investigation.

Distinctive HBV Replication Capacity and Susceptibility to Tenofovir Induced by a Polymerase Point Mutation in Hepatoma Cell Lines and Primary Human Hepatocytes

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) has been regarded as the most potent drug for treating patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). However recently, viral mutations associated with tenofovir have been reported. Here, we found a CHB patient with suboptimal response after more than 4 years of TDF treatment. Clonal analysis of hepatitis B virus (HBV) isolated from sequential sera of this patient identified the seven previously reported TDF-resistant mutations (CYELMVI). Interestingly, a threonine to alanine mutation at the 301 amino acid position of the reverse-transcriptase (RT) domain, (rtT301A), was commonly accompanied with CYELMVI at a high rate (72.7%). Since the rtT301A mutation has not been reported yet, we investigated the role of this naturally occurring mutation on the viral replication and susceptibility to tenofovir in various liver cells (hepatoma cells as well as primary human hepatocytes). A cell-based phenotypic assay revealed that the rtT301A mutation dramatically impaired the replication ability with meaningful reduction in sensitivity to tenofovir in hepatoma cell lines. However, attenuated viral replication by the rtT301A mutation was significantly restored in primary human hepatocytes (PHHs). Our findings suggest that the replication capability and drug sensitivity of HBV is different between hepatoma cell lines and PHHs. Therefore, our study emphasizes that validation studies should be performed not only in the liver cancer cell lines but also in the PHHs to understand the exact viral fitness under antiviral pressure in patients.

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of antiviral regimens for entecavir-resistant hepatitis B: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients who had exposed to lamivudine (LAM) and telbivudine (LdT) had high risk of developing entecavir (ETV)-resistance after long-term treatment. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and a network meta-analysis on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness on antiviral regimens in CHB patients with ETV-resistance.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science for studies on nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) treatment [including tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-based rescue therapies, adefovir (ADV)-based rescue therapies and double-dose ETV therapy] in CHB patients with ETV-resistance. The network meta-analysis was conducted for 1-year complete virological response (CVR) and biological response (BR) rates using GeMTC and ADDIS. A cost-effective analysis was conducted to select an economic and effective treatment regimen based on the 1-year CVR rate.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies were finally included in this analysis. The antiviral efficacy was estimated. On network meta-analysis, the 1-year CVR rate in ETV-TDF [odds ratio (OR)  = 22.30; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 2.78-241.93], LAM-TDF (OR  = 70.67; 95 % CI: 5.16-1307.45) and TDF (OR  = 16.90; 95 % CI: 2.28-186.30) groups were significantly higher than that in the ETV double-dose group; the 1-year CVR rate in the LAM-TDF group (OR  = 14.82; 95 % CI: 1.03-220.31) was significantly higher than that in the LAM/LdT-ADV group. The 1-year BR rate of ETV-TDF (OR = 28.68; 95 % CI: 1.70-1505.08) and TDF (OR = 21.79; 95 % CI: 1.43-1070.09) therapies were significantly higher than that of ETV double-dose therapy. TDF-based therapies had the highest possibility to achieve the CVR and BR at 1 year, in which LAM-TDF combined therapy was the most effective regimen. The ratio of cost/effectiveness for 1-year treatment was 8 526, 17 649, 20 651 Yuan in the TDF group, TDF-ETV group, and ETV-ADV group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

TDF-based combined therapies such as ETV-TDF and LAM-TDF therapies were the first-line treatment if financial condition is allowed.

Tenofovir-based combination therapy or monotherapy for multidrug-resistant chronic hepatitis B: Long-term data from a multicenter cohort study

The treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is challenging. Herein, we report a multicenter prospective cohort study for the evaluation of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-based therapy for MDR CHB in a real-life setting. The inclusion criteria comprised patients with resistance to more than two nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA) classes and hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA level of ≥200 IU/mL. The primary end-point was virologic response (VR), defined as undetectable HBV DNA (<20 IU/mL) after 60 months. A total of 236 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean HBV DNA level was 4.16 ± 1.44 log IU/mL; 26.7% of patients had liver cirrhosis. Before the initiation of TDF, 33.5%, 44.9% and 21.6% of patients had mutations resistant to L-NA + adefovir, L-NA + entecavir (ETV) and L-NA + adefovir + ETV, respectively. A total of 184 patients received TDF-based combination therapy [TDF + ETV (n = 178) or TDF + L-NA (n = 6)], and 52 patients received TDF monotherapy. In the entire cohort, the VR rates were 77.2%, 89.9% and 92.2% at 12, 36 and 60 months, respectively. The VR rates were not significantly different between the combination therapy and the monotherapy group after 12 (76.2% vs 80.4%, P = .533), 36 (89.8% vs 90.3%, P = 1.000) or 60 (92.9% vs 87.5%, P = .499) months. Also, there was no significant difference in the cumulative VR rates for 5 years between the treatment groups (P = .910). Newly developed antiviral resistance was not observed. TDF-based therapy was effective for the treatment of MDR CHB. The efficacy of TDF monotherapy was not different from that of the TDF-based combination therapy.

Japan Society of Hepatology Guidelines for the Management of Hepatitis B Virus Infection: 2019 update

The Drafting Committee for Hepatitis Management Guidelines established by the Japan Society of Hepatology published the first version of the Guidelines for the Management of Hepatitis B in 2013 (first English version in 2014), and has since been publishing updates to the Guidelines as new drugs become available, with the latest original Japanese version being Version 3.1. Herein, the Drafting Committee publishes the second English version that contains all the changes made since the first English version of the guidelines was published in 2014. This 2019 version covers: (i) the nucleos(t)ide analogs, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and tenofovir alafenamide; (ii) updates to treatment recommendations and management of drug-resistant hepatitis B virus that reflect the new availability of these drugs; and (iii) new information about hepatitis B virus reactivation with each update. This latest update also contains information about treatment goals, indications for treatment and cessation of nucleos(t)ide analog therapy, most of which were covered by the first version.

Entecavir+tenofovir vs. lamivudine/telbivudine+adefovir in chronic hepatitis B patients with prior suboptimal response

Background/Aims

Suboptimal responses to lamivudine or telbivudine plus adefovir (LAM/LdT+ADV) rescue therapy are common in patients with LAM-resistant hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections. We compared patients switched to entecavir plus tenofovir (ETV+TDF) to those maintained on LAM/LdT+ADV.

Methods

This prospective randomized controlled trial examined 91 patients whose serum HBV DNA levels were greater than 60 IU/mL after at least 24 weeks of treatment with LAM/LdT+ADV for LAM-resistant HBV. Patients were randomized to receive a new treatment (ETV+TDF, n=45) or maintained on the same treatment (LAM/LdT+ADV, n=46) for 48 weeks. Patients with baseline ADV resistance were excluded.

Results

Compared to LAM/LdT+ADV group, ETV+TDF group had more patients with a virologic response (42/45 [93.33%] vs. 3/46 [6.52%], P<0.001) and had a greater mean reduction in serum HBV DNA level from baseline (-4.16 vs. -0.37 log₁₀ IU/mL, P<0.001). Multivariate analysis indicated that high baseline HBV DNA level (P=0.005) and LAM/LdT+ADV maintenance therapy (P=0.001) were negatively associated with virologic response. At week 48, additional ADV- or ETV-associated mutations were cleared in ETV+TDF group, but such mutations were present in 4.3% of patients in LAM/LdT+ADV group (P=0.106). The two groups had similar rates of adverse events.

Conclusions

ETV+TDF combination treatment led to a significantly higher rate of virologic response compared to LAM/LdT+ADV combination treatment in patients with LAM-resistant HBV who had suboptimal responses to LAM/LdT+ADV regardless of HBV genotypic resistance profile (NCT01597934).

Entecavir resistance mutations rtL180M/T184L/M204V combined with rtA200V lead to tenofovir resistance

BACKGROUND

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) imposes a high genetic barrier to drug resistance and potently inhibits replication of multidrug-resistant hepatitis B virus. Few clinical cases with confirmed TDF-resistance have been reported to date.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Here, we report viral rebound in a patient with chronic hepatitis B who underwent TDF monotherapy and harboured a quadruple mutant consisting of classic entecavir (ETV)-resistance mutations (rtL180M/T184L/M204V) together with an rtA200V mutation in the reverse transcriptase gene. Sequencing analysis revealed that this quadruple mutant emerged as a major viral population. In vitro phenotyping demonstrated that the rtL180M/T184L/A200V/M204V mutant had moderate resistance to TDF treatment, with a 4.52-fold higher half maximal effective concentration than that of wild-type virus. Importantly, this patient with TDF resistance achieved virological suppression after TDF/ETV combination rescue therapy.

CONCLUSION

An rtL180M/T184L/A200V/M204V mutant with moderate resistance to TDF monotherapy was selected during sequential nucleoside analogue (NA) treatment in a stepwise manner. ETV/TDF combination therapy effectively suppressed replication of this TDF-resistant mutant. Our studies provide novel insights into the treatment of NA-naïve patients as well as patients with TDF resistance.

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.

Monotherapy with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for adefovir-resistant vs. entecavir-resistant chronic hepatitis B: A 5-year clinical trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy has displayed non-inferior efficacy to TDF plus entecavir (ETV) combination therapy in patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) resistant to ETV and/or adefovir (ADV). Nonetheless, the virologic response rate was suboptimal in patients receiving up to 144 weeks of TDF monotherapy. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of TDF monotherapy given for up to 240 weeks.

METHODS

One trial enrolled patients with ETV resistance without ADV resistance (n = 90), and another trial included patients with ADV resistance (n = 102). Most patients (91.2%) also had lamivudine resistance. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive TDF monotherapy or TDF + ETV combination therapy for 48 weeks, and then TDF monotherapy until week 240. We compared efficacy between the studies and safety in the pooled population at 240 weeks.

RESULTS

At week 240, the proportion of patients with serum HBV DNA <15 IU/ml was not significantly different between the ETV and ADV resistance groups in the full analysis set (84.4% vs. 73.5%; p = 0.07), which was significantly different by on-treatment analysis (92.7% vs. 79.8%; p = 0.02). Virologic blips associated with poor medication adherence occurred in 7 patients throughout the 240 weeks. None developed additional HBV resistance mutations. Among the 170 HBV e antigen (HBeAg)-positive patients at baseline, 12 (7.1%) achieved HBeAg seroconversion at week 240. None achieved HBV surface antigen seroclearance. Significant decreases from baseline were observed at week 240 in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (-3.21 ml/min/1.73 m² by the CKD-EPI equation, p <0.001) and bone mineral density (g/cm²) at the femur (-2.48%, p <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Up to 240 weeks of TDF monotherapy provided an increasing virologic response rate in heavily pretreated patients with HBV resistant to ETV and/or ADV. However, it was associated with poor serological responses and decreasing renal function and bone mineral density. (ClinicalTrials.gov No, NCT01639066 and NCT01639092).

LAY SUMMARY

In patients chronically infected with hepatitis B virus resistant to multiple drugs including lamivudine, entecavir, and/or adefovir, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy showed non-inferior efficacy compared with the combination therapy of TDF plus entecavir. Nonetheless, short-term TDF monotherapy was associated with suboptimal virologic response, and its long-term safety was uncertain. This study displayed that 240 weeks of TDF monotherapy provided a virologic response in most of those patients, but it was associated with poor serological responses and decreasing renal function and bone mineral density.

Identification of a quadruple mutation that confers tenofovir resistance in chronic hepatitis B patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is one the most potent nucleot(s)ide analogues for treating chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Phenotypic resistance caused by genotypic resistance to TDF has not been reported. This study aimed to characterize HBV mutations that confer tenofovir resistance.

METHODS

Two patients with viral breakthrough during treatment with TDF-containing regimens were prospectively enrolled. The gene encoding HBV reverse transcriptase was sequenced. Eleven HBV clones harboring a series of mutations in the reverse transcriptase gene were constructed by site-directed mutagenesis. Drug susceptibility of each clone was determined by Southern blot analysis and real-time PCR. The relative frequency of mutants was evaluated by ultra-deep sequencing and clonal analysis.

RESULTS

Five mutations (rtS106C [C], rtH126Y [Y], rtD134E [E], rtM204I/V, and rtL269I [I]) were commonly found in viral isolates from 2 patients. The novel mutations C, Y, and E were associated with drug resistance. In assays for drug susceptibility, the IC₅₀ value for wild-type HBV was 3.8 ± 0.6 µM, whereas the IC₅₀ values for CYE and CYEI mutants were 14.1 ± 1.8 and 58.1 ± 0.9 µM, respectively. The IC₉₀ value for wild-type HBV was 30 ± 0.5 µM, whereas the IC₉₀ values for CYE and CYEI mutants were 185 ± 0.5 and 790 ± 0.2 µM, respectively. Both tenofovir-resistant mutants and wild-type HBV had similar susceptibility to the capsid assembly modulator NVR 3-778 (IC₅₀ <0.4 µM vs. IC₅₀ = 0.4 µM, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reveals that the quadruple (CYEI) mutation increases the amount of tenofovir required to inhibit HBV by 15.3-fold in IC₅₀ and 26.3-fold in IC₉₀. These results demonstrate that tenofovir-resistant HBV mutants can emerge, although the genetic barrier is high.

LAY SUMMARY

Tenofovir is the most potent nucleotide analogue for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection and there has been no hepatitis B virus mutation that confers >10-fold resistance to tenofovir up to 8 years. Herein, we identified, for the first time, a quadruple mutation that conferred 15.3-fold (IC₅₀) and 26.3-fold (IC₉₀) resistance to tenofovir in 2 patients who experienced viral breakthrough during tenofovir treatment.

Longitudinal Assessment of Three Serum Biomarkers to Detect Very Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma

We aimed to determine the surveillance performance of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), lectin-reactive AFP (AFP-L3), des-gamma-carboxy prothrombin (DCP), and their combinations for the early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by using prospectively collected longitudinal samples in patients at risk. Among 689 patients with cirrhosis and/or chronic hepatitis B who participated in four prospective studies, 42 HCC cases were diagnosed, selected, and matched with 168 controls for age, sex, etiology, cirrhosis, and duration of follow-up in a 1:4 ratio. Levels of AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP at the time of HCC diagnosis, month -6, and month -12 were compared between cases and controls. Of 42 HCC cases, 39 (93%) had cirrhosis, 36 (85.7%) had normal alanine aminotransferase levels, and 31 (73.8%) had very early-stage HCC (single <2 cm). AFP and AFP-L3 began to increase from 6 months before diagnosis of HCC in cases (P < 0.05), while they remained unchanged in controls. At HCC diagnosis, the area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUROCs) for AFP, AFP-L3, and DCP were 0.77, 0.73, and 0.71, respectively. Combining AFP and AFP-L3 showed a higher AUROC (0.83), while adding DCP did not further improve the AUROC (0.86). With the optimal cutoff values (AFP, 5 ng/mL; AFP-L3, 4%), the sensitivity and specificity of AFP and AFP-L3 combination were 79% and 87%, respectively. The sensitivity of ultrasonography was 48.6%, which was increased to 88.6% and 94.3% by adding AFP and AFP + AFP-L3, respectively. Conclusion: Among three biomarkers, AFP showed the best performance in discriminating HCC cases from controls; the AFP and AFP-L3 combination, adopting cutoff values (5 ng/mL and 4%, respectively), significantly improved the sensitivity for detecting HCC at a very early stage.

Prevalence of the entecavir-resistance-inducing mutation rtA186T in a large cohort of Chinese hepatitis B virus patients

This study aimed to clarify whether rtA186T and rtI163V substitutions of hepatitis B virus (HBV) contributed to entecavir (ETV) resistance. A total of 22,009 Chinese patients with chronic HBV infection who received resistance testing at Beijing 302 Hospital from 2007 to 2016 were enrolled. Among them, 6170 patients had been treated with ETV. The HBV reverse transcriptase gene was screened by direct sequencing and verified by clonal sequencing. Phenotypic analysis was performed for evaluating replication capacity and drug susceptibility. Classical ETV-resistance mutations rtT184/S202/M250substitution+rtM204V/I±L180M (LAM-r), rtA186T, and rtI163V were detected in 1252 (5.69%), 14 (0.06%), and 230 (1.05%) of the 22,009 patients, respectively. The rtA186T mutation always coexisted with LAM-r, but not with rtI163V. The 14 rtA186T-positive patients were all treated with LAM and ETV, and the emergence of the rtA186T+LAM-r was closely associated with virological breakthrough or inadequate virological response to ETV. By contrast, the emergence of rtI163V was not related to ETV treatment. Six rtA186T-positive patients were followed up longitudinally, showing that these patients all had received sequential adefovir and LAM monotherapies prior to ETV treatment. Compared to wild-type strain, two patient-derived mutants' rtL180M+A186T+M204V and rtL180M+T184S+A186T+M204V had 86.7% and 89.2% decreased replication capacity, 210- and 555-fold increased ETV resistance, respectively; and artificial elimination of rtA186T largely restored their ETV sensitivity. The rtA186T mutants remained sensitive to tenofovir. In conclusion, our study confirmed that rtA186T plus LAM-r is a novel ETV-resistance mutation pattern which conferred ETV resistance in multiple Chinese patients.

Management of Hepatitis B Virus Infection: 2018 Guidelines from the Canadian Association for the Study of Liver Disease and Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is an important public health problem in Canada. In keeping with evolving evidence and understanding of HBV pathogenesis, the Canadian Association for the Study of Liver Disease periodically publishes HBV management guidelines. The goals of the 2018 guidelines are to (1) highlight the public health impact of HBV infection in Canada and the need to improve diagnosis and linkage to care, (2) recommend current best-practice guidelines for treatment of HBV, (3) summarize the key HBV laboratory diagnostic tests, and (4) review evidence on HBV management in special patient populations and include more detail on management of HBV in pediatric populations. An overview of novel HBV tests and therapies for HBV in development is provided to highlight the recent advances in HBV clinical research. The aim and scope of these guidelines are to serve as an up-to-date, comprehensive resource for Canadian health care providers in the management of HBV infection.

Taiwan consensus statement on the management of chronic hepatitis B

The experts of Taiwan Association for the Study of Liver (TASL) have actively participated and led the guidelines on hepatitis B virus (HBV) management by Asian Pacific Association for the Study of Liver (APASL) which is the first international association for the study of liver to publish the statement on HBV management before. However, there are more and more new data on the natural history and treatment of HBV infection in the past decade. These include new application of an old biomarker (quantitative HBsAg), clinical significance of HBV genotype and naturally occurring mutations, the role of non-invasive examination in evaluating severity of hepatic fibrosis, clinical significance of outcome calculators, new drug or new combination strategies towards more effective therapy and organ transplantation including liver and non-liver transplantation. It is time to publish the guidelines on HBV management of Taiwan. Hence, TASL have conducted an expert meeting to review, to discuss and to debate the relevant literatures, followed by draft the manuscript of HBV management guidelines and recommendations. The guidelines include general management, indications for fibrosis assessment, time to start or stop drug therapy, choice of drug to initiate therapy, when and how to monitor the patients during and after stopping drug therapy. Recommendations on the therapy of patients in special circumstances, including women in childbearing age, patients with antiviral drug resistance, concurrent viral infection, hepatic decompensation, patient receiving immune suppression or chemotherapy and patients in the setting of liver transplantation and hepatocellular carcinoma, are also included.

Switching to tenofovir vs continuing entecavir for hepatitis B virus with partial virologic response to entecavir: a randomized controlled trial

Entecavir 0.5 mg (ETV) is widely used among treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. However, 10%-30% of patients show partial virologic response (PVR) to the drug. If the hepatitis B virus (HBV) continues to replicate, the underlying liver disease may progress. Herein, we compared the efficacy of switching to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) with that of continuing ETV in CHB patients with PVR to ETV. This was an open-label randomized controlled trial including CHB patients who had been receiving 0.5 mg of ETV for >12 months, but who still had detectable HBV DNA levels of >60 IU/mL without known resistance to ETV. Sixty patients were enrolled and 45 qualified for the study: Twenty-two patients were randomly assigned into the TDF group and 23 into the ETV group. After 12 months of treatment, the virologic response rate (HBV DNA <20 IU/mL) was significantly higher in the TDF group than in the ETV group, as measured using per-protocol analysis (55% vs 20%; P = .022) and intention-to-treat analysis (50% vs 17.4%; P = .020). The reduction in HBV DNA was greater (-1.13 vs -0.67 log₁₀ IU/mL; P = .024), and the mean HBV DNA level was lower (1.54 vs 2.01 log₁₀ IU/mL; P = .011) in the TDF group than in the ETV group. In conclusion, to achieve optimal response in CHB patients with PVR to ETV, switching to TDF would be a better strategy than continuing ETV. Appropriate modification of therapy would further improve the outcome of chronic HBV infection.

Step-down strategy in antiviral resistant chronic hepatitis B patients who achieved viral suppression with rescue combination therapy

In the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with drug resistance, rescue combination therapy leads to viral suppression in almost all patients. However, once it is achieved, lifelong maintenance especially, by using combination therapy is not always possible in a significant proportion of patients. At present, there is no consensus on whether it is possible to switch to monotherapy from combination therapy. However, there is robust evidence to support step-down therapy, which involves switching from combination therapy to monotherapy in antiviral resistant CHB patients who achieve complete viral response from combination therapy. We review the evidence in favor of switching to monotherapy in antiviral resistant CHB patients who achieve complete viral response by combination therapy.

Chronic Hepatitis B Infection: A Review

IMPORTANCE

More than 240 million individuals worldwide are infected with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV). Among individuals with chronic HBV infection who are untreated, 15% to 40% progress to cirrhosis, which may lead to liver failure and liver cancer.

OBSERVATIONS

Pegylated interferon and nucleos(t)ide analogues (lamivudine, adefovir, entecavir, tenofovir disoproxil, and tenofovir alafenamide) suppress HBV DNA replication and improve liver inflammation and fibrosis. Long-term viral suppression is associated with regression of liver fibrosis and reduced risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in cohort studies. The cure (defined as hepatitis B surface antigen loss with undetectable HBV DNA) rates after treatment remain low (3%-7% with pegylated interferon and 1%-12% with nucleos[t]ide analogue therapy). Pegylated interferon therapy can be completed in 48 weeks and is not associated with the development of resistance; however, its use is limited by poor tolerability and adverse effects such as bone marrow suppression and exacerbation of existing neuropsychiatric symptoms such as depression. Newer agents (entecavir, tenofovir disoproxil, and tenofovir alafenamide) may be associated with a significantly reduced risk of drug resistance compared with older agents (lamivudine and adefovir) and should be considered as the first-line treatment.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Antiviral treatment with either pegylated interferon or a nucleos(t)ide analogue (lamivudine, adefovir, entecavir, tenofovir disoproxil, or tenofovir alafenamide) should be offered to patients with chronic HBV infection and liver inflammation in an effort to reduce progression of liver disease. Nucleos(t)ide analogues should be considered as first-line therapy. Because cure rates are low, most patients will require therapy indefinitely.

Switching from tenofovir and nucleoside analogue therapy to tenofovir monotherapy in virologically suppressed chronic hepatitis B patients with antiviral resistance

It is unclear whether chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with antiviral resistance, who achieve a complete virologic response (CVR) with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and nucleoside analogue (NUC) combination therapy, maintain CVR if switched to TDF monotherapy. We investigated the persistence of CVR after cessation of NUC in virologically suppressed antiviral resistant CHB patients using TDF+NUC combination therapy. This study recruited 76 antiviral-resistant CHB patients showing CVR on TDF+entecavir (ETV) (n = 52), TDF+lamivudine (LAM; n = 14), and TDF+telbivudine (LdT; n = 10) combination therapy, who were switched to TDF monotherapy as step-down therapy. At baseline, 47 patients were male and the median age was 53.0 years (range: 30-78 years); 72.3% cases were hepatitis B e antigen-positive (HBeAg+) and 23.7% were of liver cirrhosis. The median duration of TDF+NUC combination therapy was 20.8 months (range: 3-46 months). At a median follow-up of 24.7 months (range: 12-48 months) after switching to TDF monotherapy, all 76 patients maintained CVR, regardless of the duration of combination therapy and the type of prior NUC and antiviral resistance. Renal dysfunction was not observed during the treatment period. The step-down strategy of switching from TDF+NUC combination therapy to TDF monotherapy in virologically suppressed CHB patients with antiviral resistance should be considered.

Tenofovir vs lamivudine plus adefovir in chronic hepatitis B: TENOSIMP-B study

AIM

To demonstrate the non-inferiority (15% non-inferiority limit) of monotherapy with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) vs the combination of lamivudine (LAM) plus adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) in the maintenance of virologic response in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and prior failure with LAM.

METHODS

This study was a Phase IV prospective, randomized, open, controlled study with 2 parallel groups (TDF and LAM+ADV) of adult patients with hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-negative CHB, prior failure with LAM, on treatment with LAM+ADV for at least 6 mo, without prior resistance to ADV and with an undetectable viral load at the start of the study, in 14 Spanish hospitals. The follow-up time for each patient was 48 wk after randomization, with quarterly visits in which the viral load, biochemical and serological parameters, adverse effects, adherence to treatment and consumption of hospital resources were analysed.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients were evaluated [median age: 55.4 years (30.2-75.2); 84.8% male], including 22 patients with TDF and 24 with LAM+ADV. During study development, hepatitis B virus DNA (HBV-DNA) remained undetectable, all patients remained HBeAg negative, and hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive. Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) values at the end of the study were similar in the 2 groups (25.1 ± 7.65, TDF vs 24.22 ± 8.38, LAM+ADV, P = 0.646). No significant changes were observed in creatinine or serum phosphorus values in either group. No significant differences between the 2 groups were noted in the identification of adverse effects (AEs) (53.8%, TDF vs 37.5%, LAM+ADV, P = 0.170), and none of the AEs which occurred were serious. Treatment adherence was 95.5% and 83.3% in the TDF and the LAM+ADV groups, respectively (P = 0.488). The costs associated with hospital resource consumption were significantly lower with the TDF treatment than the LAM+ADV treatment (€4943 ± 1059 vs €5811 ± 1538, respectively, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

TDF monotherapy proved to be safe and not inferior to the LAM+ADV combination therapy in maintaining virologic response in patients with CHB and previous LAM failure. In addition, the use of TDF generated a significant savings in hospital costs.

Renal safety of tenofovir and/or entecavir in patients with chronic HBV monoinfection

Background

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) are recommended as the first-line therapy for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) due to their genetic barrier to resistance and effectiveness of virological suppression. TDF and ETV may cause renal toxicity through various mechanisms such as renal tubular injury, apoptosis, and mitochondrial toxicity. The aims of the current review were to assess the potential renal toxicity associated with the use of TDF and ETV in patients infected with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) and to provide clinical perspectives on these two agents in the treatment of CHB.

Methods

A literature search of clinical studies published in PubMed and posted on ClinicalTrials.gov website was implemented to find studies evaluating the potential renal toxicity of TDF and ETV.

Results

Twenty-one studies were examined in this review. The TDF dose used in the studies was 245 or 300 mg/day and that of ETV was 0.5 or 1 mg/day. Based on the markers of renal function, patients treated with TDF were not more likely to show changes in renal function than those treated with ETV; however, the estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) of patients receiving TDF tended to be more clearly reduced than those of patients receiving ETV. The eGFRs of patients treated with TDF decreased in a time-dependent manner, whereas those of patients treated with ETV increased or decreased across various time points.

Conclusion

The data shown in this study suggest that use of TDF and ETV could be at least associated with reductions in renal function in patients with chronic HBV infection. However, various risk factors, such as pre-existing renal failure and comorbidities, are also associated with decreased renal function during the treatment of TDF and ETV. Thus, studies of management strategies for HBV-infected patients with these risk factors are necessary in the near future.

Efficacy and safety of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate rescue therapy for chronic hepatitis B patients who failed other nucleos(t)ide analogs

AIM

Acquisition of nucleos(t)ide analog (NA) inhibitor resistance is critical in successful chronic hepatitis B treatment. As the pattern of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) resistance mutations differs from that of other antiviral drugs, we sought to clarify the salvaging potential of TDF in patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection who are poor responders or resistant to other NAs.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label study was carried out from December 2011 to October 2014. Poor responders defined as subjects with serum HBV-DNA levels >4 log₁₀  copies/mL were enrolled. Subjects receiving lamivudine (LAM) + adefovir pivoxil (ADV) before the initiation of the study were switched to LAM + TDF. Subjects on entecavir hydrate (ETV) with or without ADV were switched to ETV + TDF. The primary efficacy end-point was the proportion of subjects achieving HBV-DNA <2.1 log₁₀  copies/mL (LLQ) at week 24. The secondary efficacy end-points were the proportion of subjects with LLQ at weeks 48 and 96, serum alanine aminotransferase normalization, hepatitis B envelope antigen/antibody and hepatitis B surface antigen/antibody seroconversion.

RESULTS

Thirty-four subjects were enrolled, 21 subjects were switched to ETV + TDF, and 13 subjects were switched to LAM + TDF. Drug resistance mutations were determined in 85% of the subjects at the time of the enrolment. The proportion of subjects who achieved LLQ was 59%, 62%, and 71% at weeks 24, 48, and 96, respectively. No serious adverse event related to TDF was reported.

CONCLUSION

Our study clearly showed that TDF containing regimens were effective in salvaging poor responders and/or those who are drug-resistant to other NAs. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01475851) and the GSK Clinical Study Register (GSK LOC115912).

Monotherapy with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for multiple drug-resistant chronic hepatitis B: 3-year trial

Combination therapy has been recommended for the treatment of patients harboring multiple drug-resistant hepatitis B virus (HBV). However, we recently demonstrated that monotherapy with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) for 48 weeks displayed noninferior efficacy to TDF plus entecavir (ETV) combination therapy in patients with HBV resistant to multiple drugs, including ETV and adefovir. Nonetheless, whether prolonged TDF monotherapy would be safe and increase the virologic response rate in these patients was unclear. Among 192 patients with HBV-resistance mutations to ETV and/or adefovir, who were randomized to receive TDF monotherapy (n = 95) or TDF/ETV combination therapy (n = 97) for 48 weeks, 189 agreed to continue TDF monotherapy (TDF-TDF group) or to switch to TDF monotherapy (TDF/ETV-TDF group) and 180 (93.8%) completed the 144-week study. Serum HBV DNA <15 IU/mL at week 48, the primary efficacy endpoint, was achieved in 66.3% in the TDF-TDF group and 68.0% in the TDF/ETV-TDF group (P = 0.80). At week 144, the proportion with HBV DNA <15 IU/mL increased to 74.5%, which was significantly higher compared with that at week 48 (P = 0.03), without a significant difference between groups (P = 0.46). By on-treatment analysis, a total of 79.4% had HBV DNA <15 IU/mL at week 144. Transient virologic breakthrough occurred in 6 patients, which was due to poor drug adherence. At week 144, 19 patients who had HBV DNA levels >60 IU/mL qualified for genotypic resistance analysis, and 6 retained some of their baseline resistance mutations of HBV. No patients developed additional resistance mutations throughout the study period.

CONCLUSION

TDF monotherapy was efficacious and safe for up to 144 weeks, providing an increasing rate of virologic response in heavily pretreated patients with multidrug-resistant HBV. (Hepatology 2017;66:772-783).

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 Efficacy of Tenofovir Versus Tenofovir plus Entecavir in the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B in Patients With Poor Efficacy of Entecavir: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the efficacy between tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and TDF plus entecavir (ETV) combination therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) with a poor response to ETV.

METHODS

We searched the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPE libraries for articles using the keywords chronic hepatitis B virus or CHB or HBV, entecavir or ETV, and tenofovir or TDF.

FINDINGS

Five studies (from CNKI and PubMed) with a total of 408 patients met the inclusion criteria: 212 patients in the TDF group and 196 patients in the TDF plus ETV group. The rates of viral suppression between the 2 groups were comparable at weeks 24 and 48 of treatment (P = 0.546 vs P = 0.818). In addition, the subanalysis revealed that no significant differences were observed in the rates of viral suppression between the 2 groups at week 24 (subgroup 1 [partial response to ETV]: P = 0.822; subgroup 2 [resistance to ETV]: P = 0.294) and week 48 (subgroup 1: P = 0.797; subgroup 2: P = 0.545). No significant differences were found in alanine aminotransferase normalization, hepatitis B e antigen loss, hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion, virologic breakthrough, and tolerability between the 2 groups at weeks 24 and 48. Therefore, the results suggest that TDF monotherapy should be chosen for patients with CHB with a poor response to ETV for reasons of economy and convenience.

IMPLICATIONS

We conclude that TDF monotherapy is comparable to TDF-ETV combination therapy for patients with a poor response to ETV; thus, TDF monotherapy may be a better choice for these patients. However, because of the limited citations in this meta-analysis, complete and systematic evidence is needed to evaluate the differences in efficacy and tolerability between TDF and TDF-ETV. Larger and longer randomized clinical trials and further studies should be conducted to verify the results.

Management of Clevudine-Resistant Chronic Hepatitis B: A Multicenter Cohort Study

Background/Aims

Data are lacking regarding the management of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) with resistance to clevudine (CLV). This study evaluated the efficacy of different rescue therapies for CLV-resistant CHB.

Methods

Patients with CLV-resistant CHB were enrolled in the cohort, and all patients developed virologic breakthrough during CLV therapy and had confirmed-genotypic resistance to CLV (rtM204I mutation) before enrollment.

Results

Of the 107 patients, 12 received adefovir (ADV), 21 received a CLV plus ADV combination (CLV+ADV), 34 received a lamivudine plus ADV combination (LAM+ADV), and 40 received entecavir (ETV) therapy for 48 weeks. The CLV+ADV group had the lowest hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA level (p<0.0001) and showed the greatest reduction of HBV DNA levels from baseline compared to all other groups (p=0.004) at week 48. HBV DNA was undetectable (<70 IU/mL) in 0%, 57.1%, 21.2%, and 27.5% (p=0.003) of the patients in each group, respectively, at week 48. At the end of the study, the mean alanine transaminase (ALT) level, rate of ALT normalization, and rate of hepatitis B envelope antigen loss or seroconversion did not differ between groups.

Conclusions

CLV+ADV combination therapy in patients with CLV-resistant CHB more effectively suppresses HBV replication than ETV, ADV, or LAM+ADV therapy.

Efficacy of tenofovir-based rescue therapy for chronic hepatitis B patients with resistance to lamivudine and entecavir

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy for 48 weeks provided a virological response comparable to that of TDF and entecavir (ETV) combination therapy in patients infected with ETV-resistant hepatitis B virus (HBV). Little long-term data in routine clinical practice are available regarding the optimal treatment of patients with ETV-resistant HBV.

METHODS

We investigated the long-term antiviral efficacy of combination therapy of TDF+lamivudine (LAM) or TDF+ETV compared to that of TDF monotherapy in 73 patients with resistance to both LAM and ETV.

RESULTS

Patients were treated with TDF monotherapy (n=12), TDF+LAM (n=19), or TDF+ETV (n=42) for more than 6 months. The median duration of TDF-based rescue therapy was 37 months. Virologic response (VR) was found in 63 patients (86.3%). The rates of VR among the three groups (TDF monotherapy, TDF+LAM, and TDF+ETV) were not statistically different (log-rank P=0.200) at 12 months (59.3%, 78.9%, and 51.8%, respectively) or at 24 months (88.4%, 94.7%, and 84.2%). In addition, treatment efficacy of TDF-based combination or TDF monotherapy was not statistically different with ETV-resistant strains or exposure to other antiviral agents. In multivariate analysis, only lower baseline HBV DNA level was an independent predictor for VR (hazard ratio, 0.723; 95% confidence interval, 0.627-0.834; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

TDF monotherapy was as effective as combination therapy of TDF+LAM or TDF+ETV in maintaining long-term viral suppression in chronic hepatitis B patients with resistance to both LAM and ETV. HBV DNA level at the start of TDF rescue therapy was the only independent predictor of subsequent VR.

A different inhibitor is required for overcoming entecavir resistance: a comparison of four rescue therapies in a retrospective study

AIMS

Little clinical data are available regarding re-establishing the effective inhibition of entecavir (ETV)-resistant mutants. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the efficacies of four treatment regimens as rescue therapy for those chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with ETV resistance.

METHODS

A total of 65 patients with ETV resistance were assigned either with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy (n = 21), ETV (0.5 mg) plus adefovir (ADV) combination therapy (n = 19), ETV (1.0 mg) monotherapy (n = 11) or ETV (0.5 mg) plus TDF combination therapy (n = 14). The efficacy and safety of four treatment regimens were compared.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences among the four study groups in baseline characteristics, including HBV DNA levels (χ²  = 0.749, P = 0.862) and hepatitis B e antigen-positivity (χ²  = 0.099, P = 0.992). The median reduction in serum HBV DNA level from baseline at week 48 was -2.37 ± 1.07 log₁₀ IU ml^-1 , -2.16 ± 0.81 log₁₀ IU ml^-1 , -1.17 ± 1.23 log₁₀ IU ml^-1 and -2.49 ± 1.10 log₁₀ IU ml^-1 , respectively (F = 4.078, P = 0.011). The TDF group and ETV (0.5 mg) + TDF group have the highest undetectable HBV DNA rate (76.19% vs. 78.57%) compared to the ETV (0.5 mg) + ADV group and the ETV (1.0 mg) group (63.16% vs. 18.18%, respectively). Two patients in the ETV (1.0 mg) group experienced virological breakthrough at week 48 and was attributed to poor drug adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

TDF monotherapy appeared to deliver the highest undetectable HBV DNA rate in patients with ETV resistance, and ADV plus ETV combination therapy could be another choice for patients with financial restraint.

Management of Antiviral Resistance in Chronic Hepatitis B

The primary goal of therapy for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is to prevent liver disease progression. Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) seroclearance or seroconversion is regarded as an optimal endpoint to discontinue treatment. However, HBsAg seroclearance occurs very rarely with nucleos(t)ide analog (NUC) treatment, and long-term, almost indefinite, NUC treatment is required for the majority of patients. In patients with drug-resistant hepatitis B virus (HBV), a combination of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV), which is currently regarded as the strongest combination therapy against HBV, would be potentially safe to prevent the emergence of additional HBV resistance mutations. However, long-term tolerance data are lacking, and cost may be an issue for combination therapies. Several recent, well-designed, randomized controlled trials have shown that TDF monotherapy provides similar antiviral efficacy compared with the combination of TDF and ETV. Furthermore, no additional HBV resistance mutations emerged during TDF monotherapy for up to 96 weeks. Considering a comparable antiviral efficacy, extremely low risk of TDF-resistance, lower cost, and better safety potential, TDF monotherapy would be a reasonable choice for the treatment of drug-resistant patients with CHB.

Tenofovir versus tenofovir plus entecavir for chronic hepatitis B with lamivudine resistance and entecavir resistance

We compared the viral suppressive efficacy of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) mono-rescue therapy (TDF group) and TDF plus entecavir (ETV) combination-rescue therapy (TDF + ETV group) in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with lamivudine resistance and entecavir resistance. One hundred and thirty-three CHB patients with lamivudine and entecavir resistance were investigated. Ninety-six patients were treated with TDF and 37 with TDF + ETV for at least 6 months. We compared the virologic response rate (HBV DNA level <20 IU/mL) between the two groups and identified the predictive factors of treatment outcome. There were no significant differences between the two groups in demographic characteristics. Up to 24 months [median: 18 (range 6-24) months], 85.4% and 89.2% of the TDF group and TDF + ETV group, respectively, achieved a virologic response (P=.068). Only the HBV DNA level at baseline was significantly associated with a virologic response in the multivariate analysis. In a subanalysis of patients with HBV DNA levels ≥4 log (IU/mL) at baseline, a higher proportion of patients in the TDF + ETV group than the TDF group achieved a virologic response (92.9% vs 68.3%; P<.001), while 90% of patients with HBV DNA (IU/mL) levels <4 log in all both TDF and TDF + ETV groups achieved a virologic response. TDF mono-rescue therapy is a reasonable option in patients with lamivudine resistance and entecavir resistance. However, the combination strategy should be considered in patients with high baseline HBV DNA levels.

Treatment Efficacy and Safety of Tenofovir-Based Therapy in Chronic Hepatitis B: A Real Life Cohort Study in Korea

Background & Aims

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-based therapy in naïve and treatment-experienced chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients for 96 weeks in Korean real life practice.

Methods

A total of 209 CHB patients with a prescription for TDF at the Seoul and Daejeon St. Mary’s hospitals were enrolled from December 2012 to October 2014. We compared the virological responses and evaluated the renal safety of treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients.

Results

An overall complete virological response (CVR) was achieved in 80.4% and 84.6% of patients at weeks 48 and 96, respectively. In a subgroup analysis, CVR at week 96 was present in 88.4%, 75.0%, 75.5%, and 83.3% of participants in the lamivudine-resistant (LAM-R) group, adefovir-resistant (ADV-R) group, multidrug-resistant (MDR) group, and suboptimal response group, respectively. In a multivariate analysis, ADV-R, MDR, hepatitis B virus DNA, and hepatitis B e antigen were independent predictors for CVR. With regard to renal safety, diabetes mellitus, cirrhosis, and an initial low estimated glomerular filtration rate were independent factors affecting creatinine elevation (≥0.5 mg/dL). Moreover, two patients with DM and cirrhosis experienced TDF-related Fanconi syndrome.

Conclusions

TDF-based therapy demonstrated sustained viral suppression and favorable safety during a 2-year treatment period. The LAM-R and suboptimal response groups showed comparable efficacy to the naïve group, while the ADV-R and MDR groups were significantly associated with a low CVR. Close monitoring of renal safety should be mandatory when treating CHB patients receiving TDF, particularly those with DM and cirrhosis.

Recent advances in treatment of chronic hepatitis B with entecavir

Entecavir (ETV) is a potent hepatitis B virus inhibitor with a high barrier to resistance, and it has been recommended as one of the first-line drugs for treating chronic hepatitis B (CHB) by guidelines from several international and national societies. This paper reviews the recent advances in the treatment of CHB with ETV, in terms of treatment adherence, efficacy in the treatment of various kinds of patients with CHB, management of patients with partial virological response, viral resistance or treatment failure to ETV, treatment cessation, sequential or combination therapy with ETV and pegylated interferon, as well as the surveillance of hepatocellular carcinoma.

No detectable resistance to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in HBeAg+ and HBeAg- patients with chronic hepatitis B after 8 years of treatment

A major hurdle in the long-term treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients is to maintain viral suppression in the absence of drug resistance. To date, no evidence of resistance to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) has been observed. A cumulative evaluation of CHB patients who qualified for resistance surveillance over 8 years of TDF treatment was conducted. Patients in studies GS-US-174-0102 (HBeAg-) and GS-US-174-0103 (HBeAg+) were randomized 2:1 to receive TDF or adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) for 48 weeks followed by open-label TDF through year 8. Population sequencing of HBV pol/RT was attempted for all TDF-treated patients at baseline and, annually if viremic, at discontinuation, or with addition of emtricitabine. Overall, 88/641 (13.7%) patients qualified for sequence analysis at one or more time points. The percentage of patients qualifying for sequence analysis declined over time, from 9 to 11% in years 1-2 to <4% over years 3-8. Forty-one episodes of virologic breakthrough (VB) occurred throughout the study, with most (n=29, 70%) associated with nonadherence to study medication. Fifty-nine per cent of VB patients with an opportunity to resuppress HBV achieved HBV DNA resuppression. A minority of patients who qualified for sequencing had polymorphic (41/165, 24.8%) or conserved (17/165, 10.3%) site changes in pol/RT, with six patients developing lamivudine and/or ADV resistance-associated mutations. No accumulation of conserved site changes was detected. The long-term treatment of CHB with TDF monotherapy maintains effective suppression of HBV DNA through 8 years, with no evidence of TDF resistance or accumulation of conserved site changes.

Treatment of chronic hepatitis B with tenofovir

Tenofovir (TDF) is a potent hepatitis B virus (HBV) inhibitor with a high barrier to drug resistance, and it has been recommended as one of the first-line drugs to treat chronic hepatitis B (CHB). This paper reviews the recent advances in the treatment of CHB with TDF, especially in terms of its efficacy as first-line and second-line antiviral therapies as well as its role in the prevention of mother-to-child HBV transmission.

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.

Treatment for hepatitis B in patients with drug resistance

Persistent hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections affect about 240 million patients worldwide that are at risk of developing liver cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma. HBV is a small, partially double stranded DNA virus with four overlapping genes and a unique life cycle, which involves the generation of an RNA template for replication via reverse transcription. Mutations occur frequently during chronic infection, and particular selection pressures select distinct mutants. Nucleoside and nucleotide analogues like lamivudine (LMV), entecavir (ETV), telbivudine (LdT), adefovir dipivoxil (ADV) and tenofovir (TDF) are used to achieve long-term suppression of viral replication. Importantly, these drugs have different barriers to resistance, explaining the higher incidence of treatment failure in the past due to drug resistant viral strains for the older compounds LMV, LdT and ADV. On a molecular level, drug resistant mutations usually affect the reverse transcriptase domain of the HBV polymerase protein. Secondary compensatory mutations restore the replication fitness of the mutant virus. From a clinical point of view, patients undergoing antiviral therapy require regular testing for HBV DNA (every 3-6 months). In case of insufficient viral suppression or viral breakthrough (>1 log increase in HBV DNA above nadir), strict adherence to therapy needs to be ensured. If drug resistance is suspected or even molecularly confirmed, rescue therapy strategies exist, usually switching to a noncross-resistant antiviral drug. LMV, LdT and ETV resistant HBV can be treated with TDF monotherapy, ADV resistance with ETV or TDF, and insufficient responses to TDF may require ETV either as mono- or combination therapy. Complex treatment histories with many antivirals may sometimes necessitate the combination of highly effective antivirals like ETV and TDF. Novel treatment targets such as core (capsid) inhibitors, siRNA targeting protein translation, entry inhibitors or immune modulators aim at improving the efficacy of antivirals in order to (functionally) cure hepatitis B.