Entecavir plus tenofovir versus entecavir plus adefovir in chronic hepatitis B patients with a suboptimal response to lamivudine and adefovir combination therapy

Comparing the efficacy and safety of tenofovir and adefovir or combined drug treatment for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) affects a vast population globally. A variety of drugs are available for the treatment of CHB, including tenofovir (TDF) and adefovir (ADV). However, the efficacy of monotherapy drug treatment is inconclusive, the safety and efficacy of TDF remain unclear, more data are needed to be included and combined drug treatment is considered to exhibit higher efficacy. To explore this issue, we performed a current literature review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of ADV vs. TDF, TDF vs. ADV + lamivudine (LAM); TDF vs. ADV + entecavir (ETV).

METHODS

We systematically searched China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Chinese VIP, and Wanfang Data, for relevant clinical trials since July 2015, all included studies were based on PICOS principles and evaluated independently by the reviewers in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook (Rob2.0). A meta-analysis was performed by using Review Manager 5.4.

RESULTS

We included a total of 32 studies, including 31 randomized controlled trials and one retrospective study involving 2,473 patients. The results revealed a low risk of bias in included studies, that the virologic response of TDF was superior to ADV (P<0.05). And TDF was also superior to ADV in Serum creatinine levels, Immunologic function, and safety profile. However, when ADV was combined with other medications, it was superior to TDF in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level and Tbil level and adverse reactions, but on other indicators, TDF was superior to drug combination therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Results showed that TDF was superior to ADV in the parameters of ALT, hepatitis B virus (HBV)-DNA reduction, HBeAg-negative conversion rate, safety, and total bilirubin levels in patients with CHB. However, when ADV was combined with LAM or ETV, they often showed the same therapeutic effect as TDF in parameters such as ALT level and Tbil level and combined therapy can effectively reduce the occurrence of adverse reactions. In this study, because the sample source countries were limited, a greater number of global studies are needed in the future to verify the current findings.

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

Background/Aims

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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