Entecavir vs Tenofovir in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Prevention in Chronic Hepatitis B Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2020;11:e00236. [PMID: 33031195 PMCID: PMC7544163 DOI: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000236]

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.

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.

Survival Trends in Sorafenib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Reconstructed Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Background

Emerging data suggest that outcomes for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with sorafenib may have improved over time. We aimed to provide robust, time-to-event estimates of survival outcomes for sorafenib in advanced HCC.

Summary

In this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs), we searched MEDLINE and Embase from inception till September 2022 for RCTs that provided data for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for sorafenib monotherapy as first-line systemic therapy for advanced HCC. We performed a pooled analysis using reconstructed individual participant data from published Kaplan-Meier curves to obtain robust estimates for OS and PFS. Of 1,599 articles identified, 29 studies (5,525 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the median OS was 10.4 (95% CI: 9.6-11.4) months. Median OS increased over time, from 9.8 (95% CI: 8.8-10.7) months in studies before 2015 to 13.4 (95% CI: 11.03-15.24) months in studies from 2015 onwards (p < 0.001). OS did not differ by trial phase, geographical region, or study design. The overall median PFS was 4.4 (95% CI: 3.9-4.8) months, but PFS did not improve over time. Sensitivity analysis of studies from 2015 and onwards to account for the introduction of direct-acting antivirals determined that hepatitis C virus was associated with reduced mortality (p < 0.001). There was minimal heterogeneity in the estimates for OS (all I2 ≤ 33).

Key Messages

Survival outcomes for sorafenib in advanced HCC have improved over time. These data have important implications for clinical trial design.

Tenofovir versus entecavir on the prognosis of hepatitis B-related hepatocellular carcinoma after surgical resection: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Nucleot(s)ide analog treatment (entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir (TDF)) is reported to be associated with decreased tumor recurrence and death in hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, yet further work is needed to evaluate the different efficacies of these two agents on the prognosis of early-stage HBV-related HCC patients after curative liver resection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From July 2017 to January 2019, 148 patients with HBV-related HCC who underwent curative liver resection were randomized to receive TDF ( n =74) or ETV ( n =74) therapy. The primary end point was tumor recurrence in the intention-to-treat population. Overall survival and tumor recurrence of patients were compared by multivariable-adjusted Cox regression and competing risk analyses.

RESULTS

During the follow-up with continued antiviral therapy, 37 (25.0%) patients developed tumor recurrence, and 16 (10.8%) patients died ( N =15) or received liver transplantation ( N =1). In the intention-to-treat cohort, the recurrence-free survival for the TDF group was significantly better than that for the ETV group ( P =0.026). In the multivariate analysis, the relative risks of recurrence and death/liver transplantation for ETV therapy were 3.056 (95% CI: 1.015-9.196; P =0.047) and 2.566 (95% CI: 1.264-5.228; P =0.009), respectively. Subgroup analysis of the PP population indicated a better overall survival and RFS of patients receiving TDF therapy ( P =0.048; hazard ratio (HR) =0.362; 95% CI: 0.132-0.993 and P =0.014; HR =0.458; 95% CI: 0.245-0.856). Additionally, TDF therapy was an independent protective factor against late tumor recurrence ( P =0.046; (HR)=0.432; 95% CI: 0.189-0.985) but not against early tumor recurrence ( P =0.109; HR =1.964; 95% CI: 0.858-4.494).

CONCLUSION

HBV-related HCC patients treated with consistent TDF therapy had a significantly lower risk of tumor recurrence than those treated with ETV after curative treatment.

Tenofovir alafenamide and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate reduce incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B

Background & Aims

Antiviral therapy may attenuate the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). We aimed to explore how tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) affect HCC risk in patients with CHB.

Methods

The REACH-B, aMAP, and mPAGE-B models were utilized to assess HCC risk in patients with CHB from two global randomized-controlled trials evaluating the impact of TAF vs. TDF treatment. Standard incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated using data from the REACH-B model as a ratio of observed HCC cases in the TAF- or TDF-treated patients vs. predicted HCC cases for untreated historical controls. Proportions of treated patients shifting aMAP and mPAGE-B risk categories between baseline and Week 240 were calculated.

Results

Of the 1,632 patients (TAF, n = 1,093; TDF, n = 539) followed for up to 300 weeks, 22 HCC cases developed. Those receiving TAF had an SIR that was lower compared to the SIR of individuals receiving TDF: 0.32 (p <0.001) vs. 0.56 (p = 0.06). In the general study population, individuals without cirrhosis at baseline had an SIR that was lower compared to the SIR of individuals with cirrhosis at baseline: 0.37 (p <0.001) vs. 0.58 (p = 0.15). Of the patients at low risk of HCC at baseline, the majority (97%) remained low risk by mPAGE-B and aMAP scoring at Week 240. Among those at medium or high risk at baseline, substantial portions shifted to a lower risk category by Week 240 (mPAGE-B: 22% and 42%; aMAP: 39% and 63%, respectively).

Conclusions

This evaluation provides evidence that treatment with TAF or TDF can reduce HCC risk in patients with CHB, particularly in patients without cirrhosis.

Impact and implications

Despite the substantial impact of HCC on long-term outcomes of patients with CHB, the differential risk of HCC development among those receiving treatment with TAF vs. TDF has not been well elucidated. Using three validated risk prediction models, we found that TAF is at least as effective as TDF in reducing HCC risk in patients with CHB. While TDF is well-studied in the context of HCC risk reduction, our novel findings underscore the effectiveness of TAF as a treatment option for patients with CHB.

Clinical trial numbers

NCT01940341; NCT02836249; NCT01940471; NCT02836236.

Efficacy evaluation of direct antiviral drugs against hepatitis B virus in improving the degree of liver fibrosis

Introduction

The aim of the study was to find an ideal index reflecting inflammation and fibrosis for patients after antiviral treatment, and compare it with imaging examination (liver stiffness measurement - LSM) and traditional liver fibrosis models (APRI and FIB-4).

Material and methods

A total of 77 chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients who achieved a sustained virological response (SVR) after entecavir (ETV) treatment were included, and the changes of various clinical indicators before and after treatment were compared.

Results

After 78 weeks of ETV treatment, WBC and PLT of 77 patients were significantly increased, while ALT, AST and total bilirubin were significantly decreased (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in serum creatinine (Cr) or blood urea nitrogen (BUN) compared to the values before treatment (p > 0.05). The three non-invasive liver fibrosis indexes, namely, LSM, APRI and FIB-4, were significantly decreased in 77 patients compared to the values before treatment (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI), fibrosis-4 (FIB-4), aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index (APRI) have a high consistency with the grading of liver fibrosis, and can be used to evaluate the severity of liver fibrosis. Among them, ARFI has good diagnostic value for the classification of different degrees of liver fibrosis and the best diagnostic accuracy.

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.

Hepatocellular carcinoma risk in patients with chronic hepatitis B receiving tenofovir- vs. entecavir-based regimens: Individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The comparative risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) receiving tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) vs. entecavir (ETV) remains controversial. In this individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis, we aimed to compare HCC risk between the two drugs and identify subgroups who may benefit more from one treatment than the other.

METHODS

Published meta-analyses, electronic databases and congress proceedings were searched to identify eligible studies through January 2021. We compared HCC risk between the two drugs using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model with anonymised IPD from treatment-naïve patients with CHB receiving TDF or ETV for ≥1 year. Treatment effect consistency was explored in propensity score matching (PSM), weighting (PSW) and subgroup analyses for age, sex, hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg) positivity, cirrhosis and diabetes status.

RESULTS

We included 11 studies from Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong involving 42,939 patients receiving TDF (n = 6,979) or ETV (n = 35,960) monotherapy. Patients receiving TDF had significantly lower HCC risk (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.77; 95% CI 0.61-0.98; p = 0.03). Lower HCC risk with TDF was consistently observed in PSM (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.59-0.88; p <0.01) and PSW (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.67-1.03; p = 0.10) analyses and in all subgroups, with statistical significance in the ≥50 years of age (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.58-1.00; p <0.05), male (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.58-0.96; p = 0.02), HBeAg-positive (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.49-0.97; p = 0.03) and non-diabetic (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.63-1.00; p <0.05) subgroups.

CONCLUSION

TDF was associated with significantly lower HCC risk than ETV in patients with CHB, particularly those with HBeAg positivity. Longer follow-up may be needed to better define incidence differences between the treatments in various subgroups.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

Previous aggregate data meta-analyses have reported inconsistent conclusions on the relative effectiveness of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and entecavir in reducing hepatocellular carcinoma risk in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). This individual patient data meta-analysis on 11 studies involving 42,939 patients from Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong suggested that tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-treated patients have a significantly lower hepatocellular carcinoma risk than entecavir-treated patients, which was observed in all subgroups of clinical interest and by different analytical methodologies. These findings should be taken into account by healthcare providers when determining the optimal course of treatment for patients with CHB and may be considered in ensuring that treatment guidelines for CHB remain pertinent.

Tenofovir versus entecavir for tertiary prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B infection after curative therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Entecavir (ETV) and Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) are the first-line drugs for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV). However, the impact of these two antiviral agents on the outcome of HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after curative therapy remains to be explored. The purpose of the present study was to compare the effect of ETV and TDF on recurrence and mortality after curative treatment for HBV-related HCC. A comprehensive literature search of multiple electronic databases was conducted from 2000 to January 2022 for studies comparing ETV and TDF for HBV-related HCC patients after curative therapy. The adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) were pooled using a random-effects model. A total of nine studies with 5298 patients were included in the final meta-analysis. TDF was associated with a lower risk of HCC recurrence [aHR 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.81] compared to HCC. TDF reduced the risk of late recurrence compared to ETV (aHR 0.58, 95% CI 0.45-0.76) but not early recurrence (aHR 0.88, 95% CI 0.76-1.02). The mortality risk was also lower with TDF compared to ETV (aHR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50-0.77). TDF was associated with a lower risk of recurrence and mortality than ETV after resection or ablation of HBV-related HCC. Further prospective randomized controlled studies are warranted to validate these results.

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.

Hepatitis B Virus Treatment and Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Controversies and Approaches to Consensus

BACKGROUND

Long-term therapy with nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) such as entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) favorably affects the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on the basis of data from randomized or matched control studies. Recent data suggest a lower HCC incidence after 5 years of ETV or TDF therapy in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients, especially those with baseline cirrhosis.

SUMMARY

Three controversial issues remain to be resolved regarding hepatitis B virus (HBV) treatment and HCC. (1) The efficacy of antiviral treatment for the prevention of HCC is not established. The guidelines of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), the Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL), and the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) for the management of HBV infection state that antiviral treatment of HBV with interferon and NAs prevents the development of HCC. Among experts in CHB treatment, however, there is disagreement on the HCC prevention effects of antiviral treatment. (2) The rationale for antiviral management in patients with high HBV DNA and normal levels of alanine aminotransferase is unclear. The AASLD, EASL, and APASL guidelines do not recommend antiviral treatment for immune-tolerant CHB patients, and the terms and methods of treating such patients remain to be clarified. (3) The efficacy of first-line treatment with NAs, including ETV, TDF, and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF), to prevent HCC in CHB patients remains unknown. Several studies have produced controversial results regarding the effects of NAs on the risk and prevention of HCC. In the present review, we discuss these 3 issues, citing recent studies and clinical management guidelines from major international associations.

KEY MESSAGES

Suggested approaches for reaching a consensus including applying the propensity score matching method, performing randomized controlled studies, and performing clinical studies with larger numbers of subjects and longer follow-up.

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.

Assessing the developing pharmacotherapeutic landscape in hepatitis B treatment: A spotlight on drugs at phase II clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Functional cure, defined as sustained HBsAg seroclearance, is associated with favorable outcomes in chronic hepatitis B (CHB). While nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) are effective in suppressing HBV replication, NAs are unable to induce functional cure at high rates. A range of novel HBV antivirals, aiming to induce functional cure, are currently under development.

AREAS COVERED

This article covered novel hepatitis B virus (HBV) antivirals that have entered phase II trials. Virus-directing agents covered include entry inhibitors, transcription inhibitors, RNA silencers, core protein allosteric modulators, non-competitive polymerase inhibitors, and viral protein export inhibitors. Immunomodulators covered include innate immune stimulators, T-cell modulators, therapeutic vaccines, and monoclonal antibodies. Upcoming developmental directions would also be discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Among novel HBV antivirals, RNA silencers, viral protein export inhibitors (with pegylated interferon) and entry inhibitors (with pegylated interferon) appear to be effective in suppressing HBsAg and may even induce functional cure. The other virus-targeting agents have variable effects on HBV DNA, HBsAg, HBeAg and HBcrAg. Immunomodulators have modest effects on HBsAg, but may have important roles in combination therapy. Upcoming trials will answer important questions on ideal dosing, long-term drug effects, and efficacy of combination regimens.

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.

Hepatocellular carcinoma after treatment cessation in non-cirrhotic HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B: A multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Scarce data exist on the effect of nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA) discontinuation on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk in HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B (CHBe-). Therefore, we assessed whether HCC risk is increased in non-cirrhotic CHBe- patients who discontinue compared to those remaining on NAs.

METHODS

This cohort study included 650 consecutive non-cirrhotic Caucasian or Asian patients with CHBe- without a history of HCC who discontinued NAs after a median of 5 or 3 years (cases, n = 325; Caucasians: 143, Asians: 182) or remained on NA therapy beyond 5 or 3 years respectively (controls, n = 325; Caucasians: 223, Asians: 102). Propensity score (PS) 1:1 matching was applied to adjust for patients' origin, age and sex.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 44 months, HCC developed in 7/325 cases and 9/325 controls or 7/245 PS-matched cases and 7/245 PS-matched controls with 5-year cumulative HCC incidence of 5.1% and 4.9% respectively (log-rank, P = .836). No difference in 5-year HCC risk was observed between cases and controls of Caucasian (3.0% vs 4.8%; log-rank, P = .510) or Asian origin (1.3% vs 2.2%; log-rank, P = .873). In both cases and controls, HCC incidence was independently associated with age and PAGE-B score. In cases alone, HCC development after NA discontinuation was associated only with pretreatment platelet counts and PAGE-B score, but not with any type of relapse or HBsAg loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that discontinuation of effective long-term NA therapy in non-cirrhotic CHBe- patients are not associated with increased HCC risk, which is not affected by post-NA relapses and/or HBsAg loss.

Methodological challenges of performing meta-analyses to compare the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma between chronic hepatitis B treatments

Despite several recent meta-analyses on the topic, the comparative risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) receiving entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) remains controversial. The controversy partly results from the arbitrary nature of significance levels leading to contradictory conclusions from very similar datasets. However, the use of observational data, which is prone to both within- and between-study heterogeneity of patient characteristics, also lends additional uncertainty. The asynchronous introduction of ETV and TDF in East Asia, where the majority of these studies have been conducted, further complicates analyses, as does the ensuing difference in follow-up time between ETV and TDF cohorts. Researchers conducting meta-analyses in this area must make many methodological decisions to mitigate bias but are ultimately limited to the methodologies of the included studies. It is therefore important for researchers, as well as the audience of published meta-analyses, to be aware of the quality of observational studies and meta-analyses in terms of patient characteristics, study design and statistical methodologies. In this review, we aim to help clinicians navigate the published meta-analyses on this topic and to provide researchers with recommendations for future work.

Effect of tenofovir alafenamide vs. tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on hepatocellular carcinoma risk in chronic hepatitis B

It is unclear whether tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) or tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is more effective for preventing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). In this study, we compared the effectiveness of these two antiviral agents for preventing HCC. We included treatment-naïve CHB patients undergoing antiviral therapy with TDF only (TDF group) or a TAF-based regimen (TAF group) at three academic teaching hospitals from 2012 to 2019. The TAF group included patients receiving TAF as first-line treatment and patients switching from TDF to TAF. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis or HCC at enrollment were excluded. Cumulative probabilities of HCC were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methodology. In total, 2,117 patients were included: 1,832 in the TDF group and 285 in the TAF group. The annual HCC incidence was not significantly different between TDF and TAF groups: 1.66 vs. 1.19 per 100 person-years [PY], respectively (multivariate analysis: adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.774 [reference: TDF group]; p = .438). Male, liver cirrhosis, hepatitis B e antigen negativity, Fibrosis-4 index>3.25 and low albumin were independently associated with a higher risk of HCC. Propensity score-matched and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses yielded similar results: 1.56 vs. 1.19 per 100 PY, respectively (HR 1.175; p = .708) and 1.66 vs. 1.29 per 100 PY, respectively (HR 0.888; p = .446). The risk of HCC development was not significantly different between TDF and TAF groups of CHB patients. Further studies with a larger sample size and longer follow-up are required to validate our results.

Impact of tenofovir alafenamide vs. entecavir on hepatocellular carcinoma risk in patients with chronic hepatitis B

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Whether entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is better at preventing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development among patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) remains unclear. The present study was conducted to explore the ability of these two antivirals to prevent HCC.

METHODS

From 2012 to 2019, treatment-naïve CHB patients undergoing ETV or TAF therapy were recruited at three academic teaching hospitals. The TAF group comprised patients starting TAF as first-line antiviral and those switching antivirals from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to TAF. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis or HCC at enrollment were excluded from the analysis. Cumulative probabilities of HCC were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

In total, 1810 patients (1525 and 285 in ETV and TAF groups, respectively) were recruited. The annual HCC incidence was statistically not different between the ETV and TAF groups (1.67 vs. 1.19 per 100 person-years, respectively) with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.681 (p = 0.255), as determined by multivariate analysis. Male, hypertension, liver cirrhosis, FIB-4 index, and albumin were independent prognostic factors for HCC development. Propensity score-matched and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses yielded similar results, with non-statistically different HCC incidence between the ETV and TAF groups (1.07 vs. 1.19 per 100 person-years (HR = 0.973; p = 0.953) and 1.67 vs. 1.89 per 100 person-years, respectively (HR = 0.949; p = 0.743).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that ETV- and TAF-treated CHB patients have similar risk of developing HCC. Further studies with the larger sample size and longer follow-up are needed to validate these results.

Non-cirrhotic hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic viral hepatitis: Current insights and advancements

Primary liver cancers carry significant morbidity and mortality. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) develops within the hepatic parenchyma and is the most common malignancy originating from the liver. Although 80% of HCCs develop within background cirrhosis, 20% may arise in a non-cirrhotic milieu and are referred to non-cirrhotic-HCC (NCHCC). NCHCC is often diagnosed late due to lack of surveillance. In addition, the rising prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and diabetes mellitus have increased the risk of developing HCC on non-cirrhotic patients. Viral infections such as chronic Hepatitis B and less often chronic hepatitis C with advance fibrosis are associated with NCHCC. NCHCC individuals may have Hepatitis B core antibodies and occult HBV infection, signifying the role of Hepatitis B infection in NCHCC. Given the effectiveness of current antiviral therapies, surgical techniques and locoregional treatment options, nowadays such patients have more options and potential for cure. However, these lesions need early identification with diagnostic models and multiple surveillance strategies to improve overall outcomes. Better understanding of the NCHCC risk factors, tumorigenesis, diagnostic tools and treatment options are critical to improving prognosis and overall outcomes on these patients. In this review, we aim to discuss NCHCC epidemiology, risk factors, and pathogenesis, and elaborate on NCHCC diagnosis and treatment strategies.

Statins associate with better clinical outcomes in chronic hepatitis B patients with HBsAg seroclearance

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to describe long-term clinical outcomes in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients after HBsAg seroclearance, and identify factors that modify disease outcomes.

METHODS

CHB patients with HBsAg seroclearance occurring between 1986 and 2017 were recruited. Primary outcome was cirrhosis/hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and secondary outcomes were hepatic decompensation, liver-related death/transplantation, and all-cause mortality. Multivariable Cox model included demographics, prior antivirals, comorbidities, drugs (statins, metformin, proton-pump inhibitors, non-selective beta-blockers), and laboratory parameters (platelet, liver function test, prothrombin time, alpha-fetoprotein [AFP], anti-HBs). Statin users were propensity score matched (PSM) with non-users (1:2 ratio) for survival analysis of all outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 913 patients with HBsAg seroclearance (male: 613 [67.1%]; median age: 53.4 years [18.5-87.0]), 129 (14.1%) were statin users. During median follow-up of 7.7 years (up to 29.1 years), 64/833 (7.7%) developed cirrhosis, 25/905 (2.8%) developed HCC, 3/913 (0.3%) underwent transplantation, and 76/913 (8.3%) died. Statins were associated with lower cirrhosis/HCC risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.44; 95% CI 0.20-0.96; aHR for every 1-year increase in use: 0.85; 95% CI 0.75-0.97). Statin users had no hepatic decompensation or liver-related death/transplantation (vs 18/778 [2.3%] and 18/784 [2.3%] cases in statin non-users, respectively). Statins were also associated with lower all-cause mortality risk (aHR: 0.21; 95% CI 0.08-0.53). PSM yields consistent results for beneficial effects of statins (log-rank p < 0.05 for all outcomes). Other factors for cirrhosis/HCC included increasing age (aHR: 1.06), diabetes (aHR: 2.03), higher creatinine (aHR: 1.008), GGT > 50U/L (aHR: 3.25), and AFP > 9 ng/mL (aHR: 10.14).

CONCLUSION

Patients with HBsAg seroclearance have favorable long-term survival. However, liver-related adverse outcomes still develop, necessitating further investigations on beneficial effects of statins.

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.