Tenofovir Versus Entecavir for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Prevention in an International Consortium of Chronic Hepatitis B

Mortality in patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with tenofovir or entecavir: A multinational study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The benefits of entecavir (ETV) versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in reducing the development of chronic hepatitis B (CHB)-related hepatocellular carcinoma remain controversial. Whether mortality rates differ between patients with CHB treated with ETV and those treated with TDF is unclear.

METHODS

A total of 2542 patients with CHB treated with either ETV or TDF were recruited from a multinational cohort. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed to balance the differences in baseline characteristics between the two patient groups. We aimed to compare the all-cause, liver-related, and non-liver-related mortality between patients receiving ETV and those receiving TDF.

RESULTS

The annual incidence of all-cause mortality in the entire cohort was 1.0/100 person-years (follow-up, 15 757.5 person-years). Patients who received TDF were younger and had a higher body mass index, platelet count, hepatitis B virus deoxyribonucleic acid levels, and proportion of hepatitis B e-antigen seropositivity than those who received ETV. The factors associated with all-cause mortality were fibrosis-4 index > 6.5 (hazard ratio [HR]/confidence interval [CI]: 3.13/2.15-4.54, P < 0.001), age per year increase (HR/CI: 1.05/1.04-1.07, P < 0.001), alanine aminotransferase level per U/L increase (HR/CI: 0.997/0.996-0.999, P = 0.003), and γ-glutamyl transferase level per U/L increase (HR/CI: 1.002/1.001-1.003, P < 0.001). No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the ETV and TDF groups (log-rank test, P = 0.69). After propensity score matching, no significant differences in all-cause, liver-related, or non-liver-related mortality were observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term outcomes of all-cause mortality and liver-related and non-liver-related mortality did not differ between patients treated with ETV and those receiving TDF.

TDF and TAF inhibit liver cancer cell migration, invasion via p7TP3

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) seems to prevent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV). However, the mechanism is still little known. This study aimed to investigate the the roles and mechanisms of TDF, tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF), and entecavir (ETV) on the malignant characteristics of liver cancer cells. Using the wound-healing assays, transwell assays, matrigel transwell assays, and cell counting kit-8 (CCK-8) assays, it was possible to identify that TDF/TAF, inhibited migration, invasion, and proliferation of HepG2 cells and Huh7 cells. To investigate the mechanisms, we performed TOP/FOP-Flash system, Western blot, and RT-qPCR assays of liver cancer cells cultured with TDF/TAF and found a lower activity of Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway compared with control cells. Finally, Hepatitis C virus p7 trans-regulated protein 3 (p7TP3), a tumor suppressor in liver cancers, was significantly increased in HepG2 cells and Huh7 cells that treated with TDF/TAF. However, entecavir (ETV)-treated liver cancer cells showed no significant difference in the malignant characteristics of liver cancer cells, activity of Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway, and expression of p7TP3, compared with the control groups. To conclude, TDF/TAF maybe novel promising therapeutic strategy for liver cancers, including HCC and hepatoblastoma, via Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway, by up-regulating expression of the tumor suppressor, p7TP3.

Comparative effectiveness of tenofovir versus entecavir in patients with hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis in Taiwan: a retrospective cohort study

Background: Tenofovir and entecavir demonstrated substantial effectiveness in the reversion of fibrosis and reversed cirrhosis in patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related cirrhosis. However, there has not been a definitive conclusion regarding the association between entecavir and tenofovir on the risk of cirrhosis-related complications. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the comparative effectiveness between tenofovir and entecavir in HBV-related cirrhosis patients. Methods: This was a retrospective study using Taiwan's Health Insurance Research Database. We enrolled newly diagnosed HBV-related cirrhosis patients who initiated entecavir and tenofovir between 2011 and 2019. Treatment groups were determined by the initial HBV antiviral medication prescribed. The primary composite outcome was the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), death from any causes, and liver transplantation. The secondary outcomes included all the individual components of the primary outcome. The incidence rate was calculated for each outcome for both treatment groups using the Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models. Propensity score adjustment was used to balance treatment groups. Results: A total of 7,316 propensity score-matched treatment-naïve patients and 3,524 propensity score-matched treatment-experienced patients were included. Within treatment-naïve patients, those receiving tenofovir showed significantly lower hazards of developing the composite outcome (HR, 0.79; p < 0.0001), hepatocellular carcinoma (HR, 0.86; p = 0.027), mortality (HR, 0.75; p < 0.0001), and liver transplantation (HR, 0.70; p = 0.0189) than those receiving entecavir. As for treatment-experienced patients, tenofovir was associated with a significantly lower risk of the composite outcome (HR, 0.82; p = 0.0033) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HR, 0.60; p < 0.0001), but it did not show a significantly different risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 0.93; p = 0.3374) or liver transplantation (HR, 1.17; p = 0.5112) compared to entecavir. Conclusion: Tenofovir presented a significantly lower incidence of cirrhosis-related complications than entecavir in patients with hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis. However, no statistically significant difference in death and liver transplantation was seen in treatment-experienced patients.

Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B (version 2022)

To facilitate the achieving of the goal of "eliminating viral hepatitis as a major public health threat by 2030" set by the World Health Organization, the Chinese Society of Hepatology together with the Chinese Society of Infectious Diseases (both are branches of the Chinese Medical Association) organized a panel of experts and updated the guidelines for prevention and treatment of chronic hepatitis B in China (version 2022). With the support of available evidence, this revision of the guidelines focuses on active prevention, large scale testing, and expansion of therapeutic indication of chronic hepatitis B with the aim of reducing the hepatitis B related disease burden.

Personalized Antiviral Drug Selection in Patients With Chronic Hepatitis B Using a Machine Learning Model: A Multinational Study

INTRODUCTION

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is reportedly superior or at least comparable to entecavir (ETV) for the prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic hepatitis B; however, it has distinct long-term renal and bone toxicities. This study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning model (designated as Prediction of Liver cancer using Artificial intelligence-driven model for Network-antiviral Selection for hepatitis B [PLAN-S]) to predict an individualized risk of HCC during ETV or TDF therapy.

METHODS

This multinational study included 13,970 patients with chronic hepatitis B. The derivation (n = 6,790), Korean validation (n = 4,543), and Hong Kong-Taiwan validation cohorts (n = 2,637) were established. Patients were classified as the TDF-superior group when a PLAN-S-predicted HCC risk under ETV treatment is greater than under TDF treatment, and the others were defined as the TDF-nonsuperior group.

RESULTS

The PLAN-S model was derived using 8 variables and generated a c-index between 0.67 and 0.78 for each cohort. The TDF-superior group included a higher proportion of male patients and patients with cirrhosis than the TDF-nonsuperior group. In the derivation, Korean validation, and Hong Kong-Taiwan validation cohorts, 65.3%, 63.5%, and 76.4% of patients were classified as the TDF-superior group, respectively. In the TDF-superior group of each cohort, TDF was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC than ETV (hazard ratio = 0.60-0.73, all P < 0.05). In the TDF-nonsuperior group, however, there was no significant difference between the 2 drugs (hazard ratio = 1.16-1.29, all P > 0.1).

DISCUSSION

Considering the individual HCC risk predicted by PLAN-S and the potential TDF-related toxicities, TDF and ETV treatment may be recommended for the TDF-superior and TDF-nonsuperior groups, respectively.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Hepatitis: Advanced Diagnosis and Management with a Focus on the Prevention of Hepatitis B-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Though the world-wide hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination program has been well completed for almost thirty years in many nations, almost HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) occurs in unvaccinated middle-aged and elderly adults. Apparently, treating 80% of qualified subjects could decrease HBV-related mortality by 65% in a short period. Nevertheless, globally, only 2.2% of CHB patients undergo antiviral therapy. The HBV markers related to HCC occurrence and prevention are as follows: the HCC risk is the highest at a baseline of HBV DNA of 6-7 log copies/mL, and it is the lowest at a baseline of an HBV DNA level of >8 log copies/mL and ≤4 log copies/mL (parabolic, and not linear pattern). The titer of an HBV core-related antigen (HBcrAg) reflecting the amount of HBV covalently closed circular DNA (ccc DNA) in the liver is related to HCC occurrence. The seroclearance of HBs antigen (HBsAg) is more crucial than HBV DNA negativity for the prevention of HCC. In terms of the secondary prevention of hepatitis B-related HCC involving antiviral therapies with nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs), unsolved issues include the definition of the immune-tolerant phase; the optimal time for starting antiviral therapies with NAs; the limits of increased aminotransferase (ALT) levels as criteria for therapy in CHB patients; the normalization of ALT levels with NAs and the relation to the risk of HCC; and the relation between serum HBV levels and the risk of HCC. Moreover, the first-line therapy with NAs including entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) remains to be clarified. Discussed here, therefore, are the recent findings of HBV markers related to HCC occurrence and prevention, unsolved issues, and the current secondary antiviral therapy for the prevention of HBV-related HCC.

Inverse Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis of Entecavir and Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B: A Large-Scale Multicenter Study

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is reportedly superior or at least comparable to entecavir (ETV) in preventing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) among chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients; however, it remains controversial. This study aimed to conduct comprehensive comparisons between the two antivirals. CHB patients initially treated with ETV or TDF between 2012 and 2015 at 20 referral centers in Korea were included. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of HCC. The secondary outcomes included death or liver transplantation, liver-related outcome, extrahepatic malignancy, development of cirrhosis, decompensation events, complete virologic response (CVR), seroconversion rate, and safety. Baseline characteristics were balanced using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Overall, 4210 patients were enrolled: 1019 received ETV and 3191 received TDF. During the median follow-ups of 5.6 and 5.5 years, 86 and 232 cases of HCC were confirmed in the ETV and TDF groups, respectively. There was no difference in HCC incidence between the groups both before (p = 0.36) and after IPTW was applied (p = 0.81). Although the incidence of extrahepatic malignancy was significantly higher in the ETV group than in the TDF group before weighting (p = 0.02), no difference was confirmed after IPTW (p = 0.29). The cumulative incidence rates of death or liver transplantation, liver-related outcome, new cirrhosis development, and decompensation events were also comparable in the crude population (p = 0.24-0.91) and in the IPTW-adjusted population (p = 0.39-0.80). Both groups exhibited similar rates of CVR (ETV vs. TDF: 95.1% vs. 95.8%, p = 0.38), and negative conversion of hepatitis B e antigen (41.6% vs. 37.2%, p = 0.09) or surface antigen (2.8% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.10). Compared to the ETV group, more patients in the TDF group changed initial antivirals due to side effects, including decreased kidney function (n = 17), hypophosphatemia (n = 20), and osteoporosis (n = 18). In this large-scale multicenter study, ETV and TDF demonstrated comparable effectiveness across a broad range of outcomes in patients with treatment-naïve CHB during similar follow-up periods.

Entecavir versus tenofovir on prognosis of hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma after curative hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

There is still controversy about whether tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) have different effects on the outcomes of patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare the prognoses between ETV and TDF treatment among patients with HBV-related HCC after hepatectomy.

METHODS

An analysis was done on data from the Taiwan Cancer Registry, which was linked to Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database, for the years 2011-2016. We identified 7107 patients with HBV-related HCC after curative hepatectomy, and 25.3% of them used ETV or TDF after surgery. After propensity score overlap weighting, 1797 patients treated with ETV (n = 1365) or TDF (n = 432) were included for analyses. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare the efficacy of ETV and TDF for recurrence and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

After hepatectomy, the recurrence rate per 100 person-years was 14.87 for the ETV group and 9.25 for the TDF group. The risk of recurrence was similar in the TDF group and the ETV group (HR [95% CI]: 0.91 [0.69-1.19; p = 0.479]), as was the risk of all-cause mortality (HR [95% CI]: 0.67 [0.42-1.07]; p = 0.091). When considering early recurrence (<2 years) and late recurrence (≧2 years), the TDF and ETV groups showed no significant differences. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses demonstrated consistent results.

CONCLUSION

Both TDF and ETV showed similar health benefits in terms of recurrence and OS in patients with HBV-related HCC patients after hepatectomy.

Meta-analysis of the occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after the treatment of entecavir and tenofovir for chronic hepatitis B

BACKGROUND

Tenofovir and Entecavir are recommended as the first-line medicine of treatment for chronic hepatitis B. The occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after the treatment of chronic hepatitis B is a major problem. For the time being it is still unclear whether there remains a difference in risk correlation of hepatocellular carcinoma after the treatment of Tenofovir and Entecavir for chronic hepatitis B. Since previous studies have raised different ideas, this article aims to come to a conclusion targeting such a topic through analyzing the latest data.

METHODS

We searched some databases, such as PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, for related studies on patients with chronic hepatitis B receiving the treatment of Tenofovir and Entecavir and then developing hepatocellular carcinoma. The search time was set to begin from the establishment time of the above-mentioned databases to May 2022. Two researchers were designated to screen the literature independently according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria set in this study; they then evaluated the quality of the literature included and extracted the data. Revman 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

After screening the literature, a total of 20 pieces of cohort study literature conformed to the inclusion criteria. Among which were 62,860 cases of patients receiving Entecavir, and 27,544 cases of patients receiving Tenofovir; there were 3669 cases with the occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma in the Entecavir group and 1089 cases with the occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma in Tenofovir group. The result of Meta analysis of these 20 pieces of literature shows that compared with the Tenofovir group, the Entecavir group has a lower occurrence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma, and the difference is statistically significant. The results are expressed as odd ratio (OR) and 95% confident interval (95%CI), (OR = 1.66, 95%CI: 1.35-2.05, P < .05). The result of Meta analysis of 10 studies related to Korea shows that the occurrence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma in the Tenofovir group is lower than that of the Entecavir group, and the difference is statistically significant (OR = 1.59, 95%CI: 1.29-1.95, P < .05). The result of meta-analysis of 5 studies related to China shows that the occurrence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma of Tenofovir group is lower than that of Entecavir group, and the difference is statistically significant (OR = 2.35, 95%CI: 1.15-4.81, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

The occurrence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma after the treatment of tenofovir for chronic hepatitis B is lower than that of the treatment of entecavir.

Tenofovir versus entecavir on decreasing risk of HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have proved that tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is associated with a lower risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) occurrence in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients and HCC recurrence in patients who underwent hepatectomy when compared to ETV. However, it is unclear whether TDF and ETV treatment, which are both recommended as first-line antiviral agents to prevent the hepatitis B (HBV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT), are associated with equivalent prognosis. We aim to compare risk of HCC recurrence and survival of patients recieving TDF or ETV after LT for HBV-related HCC.

METHOD

We performed a retrospective study including 316 patients who received treatment with ETV or TDF after LT for HBV-related HCC from 2015 January to 2021 Augest. The Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) of TDF and ETV groups were analyzed and compared by propensity score-matched (PSM), multivariable Cox regression analysis, competing risk analysis, sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses.

RESULT

Compared with ETV, TDF therapy was associated with significantly higher RFS rates in the entire cohort (P < 0.01), PSM cohort (P < 0.01) and beyond-Milan cohort (P < 0.01). By multivariable analysis, TDF group was associated with significantly lower rates of HCC recurrence (HR, 0.33; 95%CI, 0.14-0.75; P < 0.01). In subgroup analyses, the similar results were observed in patients with following tumor characteristics: Maximum diameter plus number of viable tumor ≥ 5, with MIV or MAT, AFP at LT ≥ 20 ng/ml, and well or moderate tumor grade.

CONCLUSION

Tenofovir decrease risk of HBV-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma recurrence after liver transplantation compared to Entecavir.

Perspectives on the Underlying Etiology of HCC and Its Effects on Treatment Outcomes

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) continues to be a serious medical problem with poor prognosis worldwide. The distribution of the major etiologies of HCC is changing due to the progress of anti-viral treatments, including hepatitis B virus (HBV) suppression by nucleoside/nucleotide analogues (NAs) and increased sustained virologic response (SVR) rates by direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for hepatitis C virus (HCV), as well as the rising trend of nonviral liver disease. Although viral hepatitis remains the most common cause of HCC, non-alcoholic liver disease (NAFLD) with metabolic syndrome and alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) are increasing. Effective and well-tolerated NAs treatment can slow the disease progression of chronic HBV infection to cirrhosis, end-stage liver disease, and reduce HCC risk. Treatment with NAs is also associated with significant improvement in the long-term survival of patients with HBV infection who already have HCC. DAAs have achieved viral elimination in almost all patients with HCV without significant adverse events, even in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis and HCC. Similarly, DAA therapy can reduce disease progression, liver and non-liver complications, and improve the long-term survival of patients with chronic HCV infection with or without HCC. Meanwhile, NAFLD is a rapidly increasing cause of HCC along with the epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes globally. NAFLD-related HCC can occur in patients without cirrhosis and is known to have a lower survival rate than viral hepatitis-related HCC. Since there is currently no specific pharmacotherapy effective for NAFLD, lifestyle modification and prevention of complications are important to improve prognosis. Additionally, ALD is the second fastest-growing cause of HCC-related deaths, especially with an accelerated trend since the COVID-19 pandemic. This review provides an overview of the epidemiologic trends in the etiologies of HCC, and the progress of treatments for each etiology and the impact on outcome in the patients with HCC.

Health inequalities in the management of chronic hepatitis B virus infection in patients from sub-Saharan Africa in high-income countries

Chronic hepatitis B virus disproportionately affects migrant communities in high-income countries, reflecting increased migration from sub-Saharan Africa. Chronic hepatitis B virus is endemic in sub-Saharan Africa, yet the natural history of chronic infection experienced by patients remains incompletely understood, with evidence of variability across genotypes and regions within sub-Saharan Africa. Clinical guidelines recommending treatment thresholds are not specific to sub-Saharan African patients and are based on natural history studies from Western Pacific Asian countries. Access to standard of care treatment is available for sub-Saharan African people with chronic hepatitis B virus infection in high-income countries; however, the evidence base for these treatments was not established in this cohort and areas of uncertainty remain, particularly regarding HCC surveillance and treatment discontinuation. Participation in phase III clinical trials for chronic hepatitis B therapies is almost non-existent amongst sub-Saharan African patients, even when residing in high-income countries that participate in multicentre trials. Engagement with sub-Saharan African patients with chronic hepatitis B in high-income countries is challenging because of the stigma associated with the diagnosis, absence of routine screening systems and the complexities involved in navigating the healthcare system. Nonetheless, improved engagement is critical if we are to achieve global hepatitis B virus elimination.

Review article: novel biomarkers in hepatitis B infection

BACKGROUND

Chronic hepatitis B remains a global health problem with an estimated 296 million people affected worldwide. Individuals are at risk of serious complications such as cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma and accurately predicting these clinical endpoints has proven difficult. However, several viral biomarkers have recently been developed, including quantitative HBV surface antigen (qHBsAg), hepatitis B RNA (HBV RNA) and core-related antigen (HBcrAg), and shown promise in a range of clinical settings.

AIMS

To critically appraise these novel biomarkers, exploring their potential uses, availability of assays and areas for future development.

METHODS

We performed a literature search of PubMed, identifying articles published in the field of hepatitis B biomarkers between 2010 and 2022.

RESULTS

Novel biomarkers such as HBcrAg, HBV RNA and qHBsAg may be useful in predicting treatment outcomes, stratifying the risk of future complications and estimating off-treatment viral reactivation. Furthermore, HBV RNA and HBcrAg titres may accurately reflect cccDNA transcriptional activity, and this is particularly informative in the context of nucleoside analogue therapy. On a cautionary note, most studies have been performed in Caucasian or Asian populations, and methods for detecting HBV RNA lack standardisation.

CONCLUSION

Novel viral biomarkers have the potential to provide additional insights into the natural history of infection and allow a more bespoke, cost-effective framework of care. However, access remains limited, and further efforts are needed to validate their use in ethnically diverse populations, confirm predictive cut-off values, and establish their role in the era of novel antiviral therapies.

Efficacy and safety of tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We used real-world data to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in treatment-naïve patients with CHB.

METHODS

We analysed 2747 patients with CHB under TAF (n = 502) or TDF (n = 2245) treatments. Virological responses (VR: HBV DNA <15 IU/ml), on-treatment ALT normalization, the incidence of HCC, renal function and lipid profiles were compared between these groups. Propensity score matching of 495 pairs was conducted for these comparisons.

RESULTS

The mean age of the total cohort was 48.6 years and 58.2% of the subjects were male. Cirrhosis had a 33.3% prevalence in the population. VRs at 12, 24 and 36 months were achieved in 70.3%, 81.2% and 83.3% of the TAF and 67.9%, 84.3% and 86.1% in the TDF cases respectively (p > 0.05 for all). Normalized ALT, as determined by local laboratory criteria (<40 U/L), occurred in 79.7%, 90.6% and 86.2% of TAF the group and 78.2%, 85.8% and 85.7% of the TDF group at 12, 24 and 36 months respectively (p > 0.05 for all). The HCC risk did not statistically differ across the entire cohort or in the PS-matched cohort. The TAF group showed a lower median increase in serum creatinine from baseline during the early study period. Compared with the TAF, the TDF group showed significant decreases in total cholesterol, triglyceride and HDL, but not in LDL.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-word data indicate that TAF has comparable efficacies to TDF in terms of VR and ALT normalization, with no higher risk of HCC.

Tenofovir is superior to entecavir in reducing HCC for patients with HBV-related compensated cirrhosis at high HCC risk scores

Background:

Both tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) are known to reduce the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). This study aimed to compare the difference in HCC risk reduction between TDF and ETV in treatment-naïve patients with CHB-related compensated cirrhosis.

Methods:

Patients with compensated cirrhosis initially treated with TDF or ETV at nine Chinese hospitals between June 2014 and March 2021 were enrolled in this retrospective study. The cumulative HCC incidence rates for the two drugs were compared for the entire cohort, and a subgroup analysis was performed according to the HCC risk scores. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to control confounding biases.

Results:

The analysis included 1453 patients (TDF group, n = 188; ETV group, n = 1265). Ninety-five patients developed HCC, with a median follow-up period of 26.1 months. The 3-year HCC incidence was 2.0% in the TDF group and 7.5% in the ETV group (log-rank p = 0.005). TDF treatment was associated with a lower risk of HCC than ETV treatment [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.222, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.070–0.702, p = 0.010] but was similar after PSM (HR = 0.483, 95% CI, 0.144–1.626, p = 0.240; log-rank p = 0.230). However, subgroup analysis showed that the cumulative HCC incidence was lower in the TDF group than in the ETV group among patients with a modified PAGE-B score (mPAGE-B) ⩾9, either before or after PSM (log-rank p = 0.048 and p = 0.023, respectively).

Conclusion:

Among patients with an mPAGE-B score ⩾9, TDF is associated with a lower HCC incidence than ETV in patients with CHB-related compensated cirrhosis.

Liver biopsy of chronic hepatitis B patients indicates HBV integration profile may complicate the endpoint and effect of entecavir treatment

AIMS

Viral integration profiles attract increased interest in the study of HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but their features in the early stage of infection and changes due to antiviral treatments remain largely unknown.

METHODS

Liver biopsies and paired blood samples were obtained from HBeAg-positive patients before and after 48 weeks of entecavir treatment, and a probe-based capture strategy was applied for analyzing the HBV integrations in these samples. Serum HBV markers, including viral DNA, pgRNA, and HBsAg, were longitudinally assessed.

RESULTS

Entecavir treatment successfully reduced the levels of ALT, AST, and HBV serological markers (HBeAg, HBV pgRNA, and HBV DNA) in all patients (<40 years old). As expected, HBV integrations contributed to HBsAg production, with the total number of integrations positively correlated with serum HBsAg level (r = 0.47, P = 0.04). Along with repressed HBV replication, the number of viral integrations in liver biopsies decreased by about 1.94-fold after ETV treatment, with viral breakpoints significantly enriched within nt 1600-1900 of the HBV genome. No recurrent events were observed both at baseline and after treatment for the same individual, and only one same integration was found in two patients. Unlike in tumors, integrations in CHB biopsies seemed to have no chromosomal preference. Moreover, CHB integrations demonstrated lower enrichment scores for open active states than tumors, such as DNase, TssA, and ZNF/Rpts, and the scores reduced after ETV treatment. The antiviral therapy led to the disappearance of the enrichment tendency of integrations in both open chromatin and heterochromatin regions.

CONCLUSION

Reduced HBV replications by the nucleoside analogue may lead to decreased viral integrations in the liver, and those contributing to the HBsAg production may consistently occur. The pattern of HBV integration after ETV treatment is more random and irregular, which may contribute to a reduced risk of liver cancer due to antiviral treatment.

Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Tenofovir vs Entecavir Treatment for Chronic Hepatitis B Virus: A Reconstructed Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Conventional meta-analyses with aggregated study-level data have yielded conflicting results for the comparative effectiveness of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate vs entecavir in reducing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk among patients with chronic hepatitis B virus. Within-study heterogeneity, between-study heterogeneity, and the inability of conventional meta-analyses to capture time-to-event data were associated with these results.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a reconstructed individual patient data meta-analysis of high-quality propensity score-matched studies to provide robust estimates for comparative HCC risk between groups receiving tenofovir or entecavir.

DATA SOURCES

Medline and Embase databases were searched from inception to October 6, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

The initial search yielded 3435 articles. Fourteen studies that used propensity score matching to balance baseline characteristics were included in the final analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline was followed. Individual patient data were reconstructed from Kaplan-Meier curves. Risk of HCC was evaluated using random-effects hazard ratios (HRs) via a shared-frailty model and a Cox proportional hazards model stratified by study group. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) analysis was conducted to account for varying estimated treatment effect across time.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The comparative risk of HCC with tenofovir vs entecavir treatment.

RESULTS

From analysis of 14 studes with 24 269 patients (10 534 receiving tenofovir and 13 735 receiving entecavir; mean age, 49.86 [95% CI, 48.35-51.36] years; 65.05% [95% CI, 58.60%-71.00%] men), tenofovir was associated with decreased HCC incidence compared with entecavir (stratified Cox HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.76-0.94] at 5 years; P = .002). However, there was no significant difference in subanalysis of clinical cohort studies (stratified Cox HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.80-1.06] at 5 years; P = .24). Among administrative database studies, proportionality was violated, and HRs could not be obtained via Cox proporational hazards-based models. The mean time to HCC development in RMST analysis was 2.8 (95% CI, 1.8-3.7) weeks longer (P < .001) for tenofovir vs entecavir at 5 years. The RMST analyses for other subgroups revealed either insignificant or minimal differences (<3 weeks) in the mean time to HCC at 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this meta-analysis, there was no clinically meaningful difference in the risk of HCC between patients who received entecavir and patients who received tenofovir. There was no difference between tenofovir and entecavir among clinical cohort studies, whereas the mean time to HCC development was less than 3 weeks longer for patients who received tenofovir vs those who received entecavir at year 5 among administrative database studies. The choice between tenofovir or entecavir should be decided based on patient convenience and tolerability.

Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis: Comparison of the Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Antiviral-Naive Chronic Hepatitis B Patients Treated with Entecavir versus Tenofovir: The Devil in the Detail

Simple Summary

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) are the preferred anti-viral agents used as first-line treatments for chronic hepatitis B. Despite many meta-analyses being conducted, it is still not clear whether TDF is more effective than ETV at reducing the risk of HCC due to the inconsistent statistical methodologies employed in previous observational studies. To reduce heterogeneity, we analysed only hospital cohort data studies with anti-viral naive patients. Additionally, unlike previous studies, we conducted subgroup analyses with enrolment criteria and socioeconomic factors that could not be corrected with statistical techniques. There is no difference between the two drugs in terms of reducing the risk of HCC in a pooled analysis of PS-matched patients. In the subgroup analysis, if there was interval of over three years from the start point of patient enrolment, we found that TDF was associated with significantly lower HCC risk. This result will provide new perspectives for future research.

Abstract

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) are the preferred anti-viral agents used as first-line treatments for chronic hepatitis B (CHB). However, the efficacy of these agents in reducing the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. We conducted this meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of anti-viral agent on preventing HCC in CHB. Two investigators independently searched all relevant studies that examined the efficacy of anti-viral agent for preventing HCC using MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases through August 2021. The extracted data were analysed using a random-effects meta-analysis model based on the inverse-variance method (DerSimonian–Laird) and expressed as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). We included 19 retrospective studies in the analysis. Although there was substantial heterogeneity between the studies, the overall pooled HR indicated that TDF significantly lowered the risk of HCC (HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58–0.90, I² = 66.29%). However, the pooled analysis of propensity score (PS)-matched subpopulations showed no significant differences (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.65–1.06; I² = 52.30%) between TDF and ETV. In a subgroup analysis, an interval of over three years in the start point of patient enrolment and excluding alcoholic liver disease patients significantly lowered the HCC risk associated with TDF. In conclusion, TDF may be more effective than ETV at reducing HCC incidence in treatment-naive CHB patients, but this effect was not consistent in the PS-matched subpopulation that reduced heterogeneity. As a result of subgroup analysis, the conflicting findings of previous studies may result from heterogeneous inclusion criteria. Further studies with standardised protocols are needed to reduce the residual heterogeneity.

Lower risk of hepatocellular carcinoma with tenofovir than entecavir treatment in subsets of chronic hepatitis B patients: an updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Previous smaller meta-analyses comparing the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients treated with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) versus entecavir (ETV) provided controversial results. This updated meta-analysis aimed to reliably identify any difference in the HCC incidence between TDF-treated or ETV-treated CHB patients in general or in specific subgroups.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for relevant studies with hazard ratios (HRs) for HCC between TDF-treated and ETV-treated CHB patients. Retrieved dates ranged from January 2009 to October 2021. HRs with or without adjustment were pooled with random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-four comparative studies involving 37 771 CHB patients treated with TDF and 72 094 treated with ETV were included. TDF was associated with lower risk of HCC compared with ETV, with pooled unadjusted HR of 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67-0.86) (24 studies) and adjusted HR of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.72-0.91) (21 studies). In propensity score matching cohorts, the TDF superiority was confirmed for unadjusted HR 0.83 (95% CI: 0.71-0.97) (14 studies) and was close to significance for adjusted HR (0.78, 95% CI: 0.58-1.04) (8 studies). Subgroup analyses showed that TDF was associated with lower HCC risk than ETV treatment in CHB patients who were from Asia (adjusted HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.66-0.87; 15 studies) or nucleos(t)ide naïve (adjusted HR:0.74, 95% CI: 0.65-0.84; 18 studies).

CONCLUSION

Current evidence from a sizable population suggests that TDF is associated with significantly lower HCC risk compared with ETV treatment in patients who are from Asia and/or nucleos(t)ide naïve.

Risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients receiving tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus entecavir in the United States

BACKGROUND

Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) are the first-line treatment agents for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV). Recently, whether the degree to which the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may be reduced by ETV vs TDF has been debated. We compared the incidence of HCC among treatment-naïve patients receiving TDF vs ETV in the United States.

METHODS

From a large administrative medical claims database of commercially insured patients, we identified 166,933 adults with a diagnosis of chronic hepatitis B and a minimum of 12 months of prior enrolment, of whom 3934 and 6127 initiated ETV and TDF respectively. Fine-Gray hazard regression models incorporating treatment propensity scores (PS) were used to estimate the risk of HCC incidence associated with TDF vs ETV; variables considered for adjustment included demographic characteristics, concomitant medication use and baseline comorbidities, as well as competing events including liver transplantation and medication changes.

RESULTS

After PS weighting, the TDF and ETV groups were well-matched. During the follow-up, 90 patients developed HCC, including 50 receiving ETV and 40 receiving TDF, giving rise to crude incidence rates of 0.62 per 100 person-years (PY) and 0.30 per 100 PY respectively. In PS-weighted, multivariable analysis, TDF was associated with a subdistribution hazard ratio for HCC of 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38-0.89) compared to ETV. Results were similar when patients ≥40 years and men and women were analysed separately.

CONCLUSION

Among commercially insured, treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B in the United States, treatment with TDF was associated with significantly lower risk of HCC than ETV.

Tenofovir vs. Entecavir on Outcomes of Hepatitis B Virus-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Radiofrequency Ablation

For patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with curative radiofrequency ablation (RFA), the effect of entecavir (ETV) vs. tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) on recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) remains unclear. We aimed to compare the outcomes of patients receiving ETV or TDF after RFA. This study consecutively collected patients who were treated with ETV (n = 202) or TDF (n = 102) for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) after curative RFA of HCC from December 2015 to January 2021 at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center. There were 130 patients in the ETV group and 77 patients in the TDF group after we performed 1-to-n propensity score matching. Kaplan−Meier and Cox regression analyses were performed to validate possible risk factors for RFS and OS. In addition, we estimated the curative effect of ETV and TDF for HBV-related hepatitis by recording the change in serum HBV DNA and ALBI grade after RFA. During the study period (median 34.1 (interquartile range: 19.6−47.4 months) months), 123 (40.5%) patients suffered HCC recurrence, and 15 (4.9%) died. In the full cohort, the probability of HCC recurrence (41.6% vs. 37.3%, p = 0.49) and overall survival (95% vs. 95.1%, p = 0.39) at 5 years were similar between the ETV and TDF groups. In the matched cohort, HCC recurrence (40.8% vs. 40.3%, p = 0.35) and overall survival (96.9% vs. 93.5%, p = 0.12) at 5 years were similar between the ETV and TDF groups. Furthermore, the early RFS (<2 years) did not differ significantly between the two groups in the full and matched cohorts (p = 0.26, p = 0.13). Compared with the ALBI grade before RFA, the ALBI grade of 80 patients (41%) remained stable or improved in the ETV group and 64 patients (64%) in the TDF group (p < 0.001). The mean time of serum HBV DNA reduction to 0 was 9.13 (95% CI: 5.92−12.33) and 2.75 (95% CI: 2.01−3.49) months in the ETV and TDF groups, respectively (p = 0.015). The RFS and OS of patients after curative RFA for HCC were not significantly different between the ETV and TDF groups. TDF therapy was associated with a better effect of protecting liver function and reducing the load of HBV. Further validation studies are needed.

Risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in antiviral treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients treated with entecavir or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate: a network meta-analysis

Background

Long-term antiviral treatments are associated with a significantly lower hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) incidence in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients by reducing HBV DNA concentrations. However, it is still controversial whether antiviral strategies affect HCC development in antiviral treatment-naïve CHB patients. This study aimed to estimate the incidence of HCC in antiviral treatment-naïve CHB patients who were treated with Entecavir (ETV) and Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate (TDF) and compare the efficacy of two treatment regimens in HCC reduction.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases were systematically searched until June 24, 2021. The pooled incidence and 95% confidence interval of HCC were calculated by the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation method. The efficacies of ETV and TDF treatments in HCC reduction were compared through a network meta-analysis.

Results

A total of 27 studies were identified as eligible for this systematic review. The incidence densities in the ETV and TDF treatment groups were 2.78 (95% CI: 2.21-3.40) and 2.59 (95% CI: 1.51-3.96) per 100 persons-year among patients with preexisting cirrhosis and 0.49 (95% CI: 0.32-0.68) and 0.30 (95% CI: 0.06-0.70) per 100 persons-year among patients without preexisting cirrhosis. As the proportion of CHB patients with preexisting cirrhosis increased, the incidence density of HCC also increased gradually. Compared with other Nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) treatments, ETV and TDF treatments significantly lowered the risk of HCC, with hazard ratios (HRs) of 0.60 (95% CI: 0.40-0.90) and 0.56 (95% CI: 0.35-0.89), respectively. However, there was no difference in the incidence density of HCC between ETV and TDF treatments (HR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.71-1.20) regardless of preexisting cirrhosis.

Conclusion

ETV and TDF treatments were associated with significantly lower risks of HCC than other NAs treatments. However, no difference was observed between ETV and TDF treatments in the risk of HCC development regardless of preexisting cirrhosis among treatment-naïve CHB patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09413-7.

Big Data Information under Proportional Hazard Mathematical Model in Analysis of Hepatitis B Virus Infection Data of Patients with Interventional Liver Cancer through Antiviral Therapy of Entecavir

The objective of this study was to analyze the application of proportional hazard mathematical model (PHMM) in Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) infection analysis of interventional liver cancer patients treated with entecavir, so as to provide data support for clinical diagnosis and treatment. Based on the survival analysis, the treatment factor x was undertaken as an independent variable to perform linear regression. The regression model took the hazard rate function as the dependent variable to establish an exponential regression equation to construct a PHMM. 136 patients with primary liver cancer receiving interventional chemoembolization combined with the drug (entecavir) were selected as the experimental group, who were in the computer gene expression omnibus (GEO). 87 patients with primary liver cancer who underwent interventional chemoembolization therapy without antiviral treatment were taken as the control group. The PHMM was adopted for comprehensive analysis. In addition, the factors affecting the virological response to antiviral therapy were analyzed using the multiple logistic regression. The results revealed that HBV deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) negative conversion rate, Hepatitis B e-Antigen (HBeAg) negative conversion rate, and HBeAg serological conversion rate in the experimental group were much higher than those in the control group (P < 0.05). HBV DNA level and proportion of HBsAg <100 IU/mL in the experimental group were much lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The virological breakthrough rate and incidence of adverse events at week 24 in the experimental group were greatly lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The adverse virological response of patient was positively correlated with HBV DNA load and HBeAg status and negatively correlated with alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level (P < 0.05). Therefore, entecavir can significantly inhibit HBV DNA replication in patients with liver cancer, showing high antiviral effect. High baseline HBV DNA load, positive HBeAg, and low baseline alanine aminotransferase levels were independent risk factors for adverse virology response to entecavir antiviral therapy, which provided a reference for the selection of antiviral drugs for HBV infection.

Efficacy of entecavir, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, and tenofovir alafenamide in treatment-naive hepatitis B patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Antiviral agents for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) reduced the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development. The outcomes of entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) were compared in patients with CHB.

METHODS

Between 2017 and 2019, treatment-naïve patients with CHB treated with ETV, TDF, and TAF were recruited from three Korean tertiary institutes. The cumulative incidences of HCC and orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) or mortality were calculated and compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis before and after trimatch.

RESULTS

Among recruited 2082 patients, 43 patients developed HCC, whereas 66 developed OLT or mortality. Before trimatch, the cumulative incidence of HCC was statistically similar among patients treated with three antiviral agents (p = 0.340). However, the cumulative probability of OLT or mortality development in patients treated with ETV or TDF was significantly higher than that of patients with TAF before trimatch (all p < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, male sex [hazard ratio (HR) 2.990] and older age (HR 1.044) were independently associated with an increased risk of HCC development, whereas higher platelet count (HR 0.993) was independently associated with a decreased risk (all p < 0.05). The type of antiviral agents did not significantly influence the risk of HCC and OLT or mortality development (all p > 0.05). After trimatch, no significant difference in the cumulative probability for HCC and OLT or mortality according to antiviral agents was found (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes of ETV, TDF, and TAF on the risk of HCC and OLT or mortality were statistically similar in treatment-naïve patients with CHB.

Treatment for Viral Hepatitis as Secondary Prevention for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Chronic infections with either hepatitis B or C virus (HBV or HCV) are among the most common risk factors for developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The hepatocarcinogenic potential of these viruses is mediated through a wide range of mechanisms, including the induction of chronic inflammation and oxidative stress and the deregulation of cellular pathways by viral proteins. Over the last decade, effective anti-viral agents have made sustained viral suppression or cure a feasible treatment objective for most chronic HBV/HCV patients. Given the tumorigenic potential of HBV/HCV, it is no surprise that obtaining sustained viral suppression or eradication proves to be effective in preventing HCC. This review summarizes the mechanisms by which HCV and HBV exert their hepatocarcinogenic activity and describes in detail the efficacy of anti-HBV and anti-HCV therapies in terms of HCC prevention. Although these treatments significantly reduce the risk for HCC in patients with chronic viral hepatitis, this risk is not eliminated. Therefore, we evaluate potential strategies to improve these outcomes further and address some of the remaining controversies.

Controversies in the Management of Hepatitis B: Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatitis B is the leading cause of hepatocellular cancer (HCC) worldwide. Untreated, annual HCC incidence rates in chronic hepatitis B subjects are 0.4% in noncirrhotics and 2% to 3% in cirrhotics. Surveillance with ultrasound with/without α-fetoprotein at 6-month intervals is recommended in at-risk persons including children. Antiviral therapy in chronic hepatitis B with entecavir or tenofovir significantly lowers the risk of HCC across all stages of liver disease, and lowers the risk of HCC recurrence following curative therapy. There are insufficient data to recommend use of tenofovir over entecavir in the prevention of de novo or recurrent HCC postcurative therapy.

Differential Effectiveness of Tenofovir and Entecavir for Prophylaxis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients Depending on Coexisting Cirrhosis and Prior Exposure to Antiviral Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

GOALS

This meta-analysis evaluated the comparative effectiveness of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) versus entecavir (ETV) in reducing the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether TDF or ETV is more effective in reducing the risk of HCC in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with or without underlying cirrhosis.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE database through April 13, 2020, for studies involving CHB treated with TDF and/or ETV. Primary and secondary outcomes were the incidence of HCC and overall survival, respectively, calculated as risk ratios (RRs). Adjusted results were further evaluated by pooling propensity score matched cohorts.

RESULTS

Of the 229 records identified, 17 studies were included in the quantitative analysis. TDF treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC development [RR, 0.63; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.43-0.93; P=0.024] and mortality (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57-0.84; P=0.003) than ETV treatment. Moreover, TDF significantly lowered HCC risk in patients with cirrhosis (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.84) and antiviral treatment-naive patients (RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.35-0.98) compared with ETV. Among treatment-naive patients, TDF significantly prolonged survival compared with ETV (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

TDF likely confers a lower risk of HCC development and longer survival in patients with CHB, especially among treatment-naive patients and those with underlying cirrhosis, than ETV.

Long-term outcome of liver complications in patients with chronic HBV/HCV co-infection after antiviral therapy: a real-world nationwide study on Taiwanese Chronic Hepatitis C Cohort (T-COACH)

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The long-term outcome of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection among patients dually infected with HBV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the long-term liver outcomes of HBV/HCV-coinfected patients after antiviral therapy.

METHODS

A total of 11,359 chronically HCV-infected patients with interferon-based therapy were registered in a nationwide Taiwanese Chronic Hepatitis C Cohort. A propensity score matched (PSM) cohort of HCV mono-infected (n = 7020) and HBV/HCV (n = 702) co-infected patients by age, sex, and fibrosis was recruited for outcome analysis. The primary outcome was liver-related complications, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver decompensation during a mean follow-up period of 4.44 years.

RESULTS

Among HBV/HCV co-infected patients, patients without HCV-SVR had a significantly higher 10-year cumulative incidence of major liver-related complications than those with HCV-SVR. However, among patients with HCV-SVR in the PSM cohort, the risk of major liver-related complications, both HCC and liver decompensation, did not differ between HBV/HCV co-infected and HCV mono-infected patients. Similar results were observed among those without HCV-SVR. A substantial lower risk of major liver-related complications was found in HBV/HCV co-infected patients with HCV SVR and subsequent anti-HBV nucleot(s)ide analogues treatment. Overall, factors associated with major liver-related complications included age ≥ 65 year-old, BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2, FIB-4 ≥ 3.25, eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2, and non-HCV SVR, but not HBV co-infection.

CONCLUSION

Interferon-based therapy reduced the long-term risk of major liver-related complications among HBV/HCV co-infected patients, as among HCV mono-infected patients. Nevertheless, post-HCV-SVR surveillance for major liver-related complications is mandatory among those high-risk groups.

Efficacy of entecavir versus tenofovir in preventing hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B with maintained virologic response

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Several studies suggested that efficacy of tenofovir in reducing the risk of the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) might be better than that of entecavir. It remains unknown whether a change in therapy can further reduce the risk of HCC in patients receiving entecavir therapy and achieved goal of antiviral therapy, a maintained undetectable hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA level in the serum.

METHODS

A total of 1336 treatment-naïve chronic HBV mono-infected adult patients, who started entecavir or tenofovir treatment and achieved a maintained virologic response during follow-up were analysed.

RESULTS

During a median 4.4 years of follow-up (range, 1.0-7.4 years) after achieving virologic response, 99 patients developed HCC. The 5-year cumulative HCC incidence rate was 7.3% and 6.3% for the entecavir and tenofovir groups, respectively, with similar risk of HCC between the two groups (adjusted HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.52-1.29; p = 0.3). The risk of HCC was similar in the propensity score-matched cohort (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.68-1.52; p = 0.94) and inverse probability treatment weighting analysis (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.74-1.66; p = 0.62). In the subgroup analysis, HCC risk was similar between the two drugs in both patients with and without cirrhosis.

DISCUSSION

In patients showing maintained virologic response, no difference in the risk of HCC between entecavir and tenofovir was observed. This indicates entecavir might be as effective as tenofovir in the prevention of HCC among those patients and suggest that a change in therapy in anticipation of further reducing the risk of HCC might not be necessary for patients receiving entecavir and showing virologic response.

Entecavir vs Tenofovir in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Prevention in Chronic Hepatitis B Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) are recommended as first-line therapies for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) infection. Although both drugs reduce hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk, their comparative effectiveness remains controversial. We aimed to determine whether TDF is superior to ETV in preventing HCC.

Entecavir versus tenofovir in patients with chronic hepatitis B: Enemies or partners in the prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma

Over the past several decades, entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) have remained the first-line antiviral agents in several international guidelines. These two antiviral agents have shown similar short to intermediateterm efficacy, including virologic, biochemical, serologic, and histologic responses. However, huge controversies regarding the antiviral efficacy of ETV and TDF in preventing the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) still exist. In this review, we summarized recent studies that compared the treatment efficacy of ETV and TDF in terms of HCC development.

Incidences and Determinants of Functional Cure during Entecavir or Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate for Chronic Hepatitis B

BACKGROUND

Long-term incidences and baseline determinants of functional cure (HBsAg seroclearance) during entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) treatment are incompletely understood.

METHODS

This is an international multicenter cohort study of treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients who initiated on ETV or TDF without baseline malignancy. Patients were observed for HBsAg seroclearance until death or loss to follow-up. We calculated the incidences and explored the baseline determinants of HBsAg seroclearance using competing risk regression.

RESULTS

The analysis included 4,769 patients (median age, 50 years; 69.05% male), with a median follow-up of 5.16 years (26,614.47 person-years). HBsAg clearance occurred in 58 patients, yielding a 10-year cumulative incidence of 2.11% (95% CI, 1.54 -- 2.88%) and an annual rate of 0.22% (95% CI, 0.17--0.28%). Baseline predictors included low-level viremia with HBV DNA <2,000 IU/mL (adjusted sub-distribution HR [aSHR], 3.14; 95% CI, 1.80--5.49), elevated serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) >200 U/L (aSHR, 3.68; 95% CI, 2.07--6.53), serum bilirubin (aSHR, 1.11 per mg/dL; 95% CI, 1.06--1.17), and fatty liver (aSHR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.03--3.29).

CONCLUSION

HBsAg seroclearance rarely occurs in CHB patients treated with ETV or TDF and is associated with low-level viremia, ALT flare, bilirubin level, and fatty liver.

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.

Recent Advances in Hepatitis B Treatment

Hepatitis B virus infection affects over 250 million chronic carriers, causing more than 800,000 deaths annually, although a safe and effective vaccine is available. Currently used antiviral agents, pegylated interferon and nucleos(t)ide analogues, have major drawbacks and fail to completely eradicate the virus from infected cells. Thus, achieving a "functional cure" of the infection remains a real challenge. Recent findings concerning the viral replication cycle have led to development of novel therapeutic approaches including viral entry inhibitors, epigenetic control of cccDNA, immune modulators, RNA interference techniques, ribonuclease H inhibitors, and capsid assembly modulators. Promising preclinical results have been obtained, and the leading molecules under development have entered clinical evaluation. This review summarizes the key steps of the HBV life cycle, examines the currently approved anti-HBV drugs, and analyzes novel HBV treatment regimens.

Entecavir versus Tenofovir for the Prevention of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Treatment-naïve Chronic Hepatitis B Patients in Korea

BACKGROUND

The occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major concern during antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis B. There are conflicting opinions regarding the effects of entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) on HCC prevention. We assessed these two antiviral medications for preventing HCC in treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using nationwide claims data from the Korea Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. We included 55,473 treatment-naïve adult cases where ETV or TDF treatment was started between 2013 and 2017 (cohort 1). The ETV and TDF groups were matched 1:2 based on age, sex, comorbidities, hospital type, and index date year. Patients were followed up until December 2018. The outcome was the development of HCC. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to sex, age, hospital type and the presence of cirrhosis. We also compared the outcomes of patients who had started antiviral therapy during the 2012-2014 period (cohort 2).

RESULTS

The matched participants (18,491 in the ETV and 36,982 in the TDF groups) were a part of the study for, on average, 41.2 months. The incidence of HCC did not differ significantly between the ETV (1.46 per 100 patient-years) and the TDF (1.36 per 100 patient-years) treatments (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.01; P = 0.081). By contrast, HCC incidence was significantly higher in the ETV group than tenofovir group of cohort 2.

CONCLUSION

In patients with chronic hepatitis B, the ETV treatment did not result in a higher rate of HCC than the TDF treatment.

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.

No difference in hepatocellular carcinoma risk in chronic hepatitis B patients treated with tenofovir vs entecavir: evidence from an updated meta-analysis

Whether tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is superior to entecavir in reducing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk among treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients remains controversial. We aimed to clarify this controversy. Several databases, including PubMed and Embase, were retrieved through November 2020. Cohort studies comparing the effectiveness of TDF and entecavir in reducing HCC incidence among treatment-naïve CHB patients were included if they reported multivariable-adjusted or propensity-score-matched risk estimates. A random-effects model was used to pool hazard ratios (HRs). Thirteen cohort studies, involving 4097 HCC cases and 80202 CHB patients, were included. Multivariable-adjusted meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in HCC incidence between TDF and entecavir groups (HR 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.04), which was consistent with propensity-score-matched meta-analysis (HR 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.03). Subgroup analysis showed that the observed similarity of TDF to entecavir for HCC prevention persisted in studies with follow-up length of ≥4 years but not in those with follow-up length of <4 years (P_interaction<0.01). In conclusion, TDF is similar to entecavir in reducing HCC incidence among treatment-naïve CHB patients. Heterogeneous results of included studies may result from their disparity in follow-up length. Our findings should be treated with caution and need to be further confirmed.

Tenofovir Versus Entecavir on Recurrence of Hepatitis B Virus-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Surgical Resection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Studies have suggested that tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) treatment is associated with a significantly lower risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) occurrence when compared with entecavir (ETV) therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B. We aimed to compare HCC recurrence and survival of patients treated with TDF or ETV after surgical resection for hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related HCC.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

This historical cohort study included 1,695 consecutive patients treated with ETV (n = 813) or TDF (n = 882) after curative-intent hepatectomy for HBV-related HCC of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage 0 or A in Korea between 2010 and 2018. HCC recurrence and overall survival of patients were compared between ETV and TDF groups by propensity score-matched and multivariable-adjusted Cox regression analyses from the date of hepatectomy for HCC. The mean age of the study patients was 54.8 years, and 1,294 patients (76.3%) were male. During the median follow-up duration of 37.6 months with continued ETV or TDF therapy, 561 (33.1%) patients developed HCC recurrence, 144 (8.4%) died, and 22 (1.3%) received liver transplant. Compared with ETV, TDF therapy was associated with significantly higher recurrence-free (P = 0.02) and overall survival (P = 0.03) rates by propensity score-matched analysis. By multivariable-adjusted analysis, the TDF group was associated with significantly lower rates of HCC recurrence (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.98; P = 0.03), and death or transplantation (HR, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.88; P = 0.01). TDF therapy was an independent protective factor for both early (<2 years; HR, 0.79; P = 0.03) and late (≥2 years; HR, 0.68; P = 0.03) postoperative HCC recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients who underwent curative hepatectomy for HBV-related HCC, TDF therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC recurrence and better overall patient survival compared with ETV therapy.

Effects of Tenofovir vs Entecavir on Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients With Chronic HBV Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir are recommended as first-line treatments for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. However, there is debate over the comparative effectiveness of these drugs in preventing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of TDF vs entecavir in reducing the incidence of HCC among patients with chronic HBV infection.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from 2010 through 2019 for full-text articles and conference abstracts on studies of effects of TDF vs entecavir in patients with HBV infection. Extracted data were analyzed with the random-effects model. Potential sources of heterogeneity were investigated using sensitivity, meta-regression, and subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

Our final analysis comprised 15 studies (61,787 patients; 16,101 patients given TDF and 45,686 given entecavir). TDF treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC than entecavir (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.93; P = .003; I² = 13%). The lower risk of HCC in patients given TDF compared with entecavir persisted in sensitivity and subcohort analyses performed with propensity score-matched cohorts and cirrhosis subcohorts. Inclusion of patients with decompensated cirrhosis and the sample size were the factors with the largest effects on between-study heterogeneity in meta-regression analyses. Subsequent subgroup analyses showed no statistical differences in the incidence of death or transplantation (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.73-1.17; P = .519; I² = 6%) between patients given TDF vs entecavir.

CONCLUSIONS

In a meta-analysis of studies of patients with chronic HBV infection, we found that TDF treatment was associated with a significantly lower (20%) risk of HCC than entecavir treatment. Randomized trials are needed to support this finding.

Secondary prevention of hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma with current antiviral therapies

Over the past decades, marked advancement has been made in the prevention and treatment of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Due to highly effective antiviral therapies for chronic hepatitis B (CHB), long-term clinical outcomes in patients with CHB has also been dramatically improved. However, current antiviral therapies for CHB cannot completely abolish the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In addition, current treatment guidelines for CHB should be interpreted with caution given that HBV-associated hepatocarcinogenesis could be underway in patients who are not eligible for antiviral therapies by current guidelines. Therefore, efforts to reconcile treatment guidelines with recent clinical evidence should be made for reducing further development of HCC. In this article, we review the secondary prevention of HBV-related HCC with current antiviral therapies.

Long-term risk of primary liver cancers in entecavir versus tenofovir treatment for chronic hepatitis B

It remains controversial whether entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is associated with different clinical outcomes for chronic hepatitis B (CHB). This study aimed to compare the long-term risk of ETV versus TDF on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) in CHB patients from a large multi-institutional database in Taiwan. From 2011 to 2018, a total of 21,222 CHB patients receiving ETV or TDF were screened for eligibility. Patients with coinfection, preexisting cancer and less than 6 months of follow-up were excluded. Finally, 7248 patients (5348 and 1900 in the ETV and TDF groups, respectively) were linked to the National Cancer Registry database for the development of HCC or ICC. Propensity score matching (PSM) (2:1) analysis was used to adjust for baseline differences. The HCC incidence between two groups was not different in the entire population (hazard ratio [HR] 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66–1.02, p = 0.078) and in the PSM population (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.65–1.06, p = 0.129). Among decompensated cirrhotic patients, a lower risk of HCC was observed in TDF group than in ETV group (HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.30–0.98, p = 0.043, PSM model). There were no differences between ETV and TDF groups in the ICC incidence (HR 1.84; 95% CI 0.54–6.29, p = 0.330 in the entire population and HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.31–3.52, p = 0.954 in the PSM population, respectively). In conclusion, treatment with ETV and TDF showed a comparable long-term risk of HCC and ICC in CHB patients.

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.

Comparison of 48-week efficacy of tenofovir vs entecavir for patients with chronic hepatitis B: A network meta-analysis

Both tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) are accepted as first-line treatments for chronic hepatitis B (CHB). However, there are few randomized studies comparing their efficacy. The primary aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of TDF and ETV using a network meta-analysis of randomized trials. The secondary aim was to additionally include propensity-matched cohort studies in a conventional meta-analysis. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science for published English-language randomized and propensity-matched studies between 1/1/2000 and 4/2/2020. Outcomes included undetectable HBV DNA, ALT normalization and HBeAg seroconversion at 48 weeks. We excluded patients who had co-infection or significant prior treatment with antivirals. 13 517 participants from 16 studies (11 RCTs, n = 2675; five propensity-matched cohort studies, n = 10 842) were included. Virological response at 48 weeks was higher in patients receiving TDF compared to ETV using both the network meta-analytic approach (OR 1.69, P < .001) and the conventional meta-analysis including propensity-matched cohort studies (OR 1.40, P < .001). On subgroup analysis, this difference was only significant in HBeAg-positive patients (OR 1.81, P = .037). There was limited evidence to suggest a higher rate of ALT normalization with ETV (OR 0.74, P = .07). There was no difference in rates of HBeAg seroconversion between the two antivirals. TDF is more likely than ETV to induce virological response at 48 weeks in treatment-naïve CHB patients. Future studies should focus on elucidating associations between early and sustained virological response with adverse patient outcomes including development of HCC or cirrhosis.

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.