Dynamics of HBV surface antigen related end points in chronic hepatitis B infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Advances in treatment and prevention of hepatitis B

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) continues to contribute to worldwide morbidity and mortality significantly. Scientists, clinicians, pharmaceutical companies, and health organizations have dedicated substantial Intellectual and monetary resources to finding a cure, increasing immunization rates, and reducing the global burden of CHB. National and international health-related organizations including the center for disease control, the national institute of health, the American Association for the study of liver disease (AASLD), The European association for the study of the Liver (EASL), The Asia Pacific association for the study of the Liver (APASL) and the world health organization release periodic recommendations for disease prevention and treatment. Our review of the most recent guidelines by EASL, AASLD, APASL, and Taiwan Association for the Study of the Liver revealed that an overwhelming majority of cited studies were published before 2018. We reviewed Hepatitis B-related literature published 2018 onwards to identify recent developments and current barriers that will likely direct future efforts towards eradicating hepatitis B. The breakthrough in our understanding of the hepatitis B virus life cycle and resulting drug development is encouraging with significant room for further progress. Data from high-risk populations, most vulnerable to the devastating effects of hepatitis B infection and reactivation remain sparse. Utilization of systems approach, optimization of experimental models, identification and validation of next-generation biomarkers, and precise modulation of the human immune response will be critical for future innovation. Within the foreseeable future, new treatments will likely complement conventional therapies rather than replace them. Most Importantly, pragmatic management of CHB related population health challenges must be prioritized to produce real-world results.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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