Nucleos(t)ide Analogues for Reducing Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

A novel disulfidptosis-related immune checkpoint genes signature: forecasting the prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

HCC is an extremely malignant tumor with a very poor prognosis. In 2023, a brand-new kind of cell death known as disulfidptosis was identified. Although, the prognosis as well as expression of immune checkpoints that are closely connected with it in HCC remain unknown.

METHODS

In this work, we identified 49 genes with abnormal expression in liver cancer and normal liver tissue, with 23 of them being differentially expressed genes. To create a signature, we classified all HCC cases into three subtypes and used the TCGA database to evaluate each relevant gene's prognostic value for survival.

RESULTS

Five gene signatures were identified using the LASSO Cox regression approach, while those diagnosed with HCC were split into either low- or high-risk groups. Patients having low-risk HCC showed a much greater likelihood of surviving than those with high risk (p < 0.05). Through immune cell infiltration analysis, it was found that immune-related genes were abundant in high-risk groups and had reduced immune status.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, immune checkpoint genes highly associated with disulfidptosis contribute to tumor immunity and can be used to evaluate HCC prognosis. When it comes to predicting overall survival (OS) time in HCC, risk score has been set to be a separate predictor. Through immune cell infiltration analysis, it was found that immune-related genes were abundant in high-risk groups and had reduced immune status. It is possible to measure the prognosis of HCC based on immune checkpoints genes strongly linked to disulfidptosis.

Rapid monophasic HBsAg decline during nucleic-acid polymer-based therapy predicts functional cure

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Analyzing the interplay among serum HBV DNA, HBsAg, anti-HBs, and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) during nucleic-acid polymer (NAP)-based therapy for chronic hepatitis B provides a unique opportunity to identify kinetic patterns associated with functional cure.

METHODS

All participants with HBeAg-negative chronic HBV infection in the REP 401 study (NCT02565719) first received 24 weeks of tenofovir-disoproxil-fumarate (TDF) monotherapy. The early triple therapy group (n = 20) next received 48 weeks of TDF+pegylated interferon-α2a (pegIFN)+NAPs. In contrast, the delayed triple therapy group (n = 20) next received 24 weeks of TDF+pegIFN before 48 weeks of triple therapy. Three participants discontinued treatment and were excluded. Functional cure (HBsAg and HBV DNA not detectable with normal ALT) was assessed at 48 weeks post-treatment. Different kinetic phases were defined by at least a 2-fold change in slope. A single-phase decline was categorized as monophasic, and 2-phase declines were categorized as biphasic.

RESULTS

Fourteen (35%) participants achieved a functional cure. HBV DNA remained below or near undetectable for all participants by the end of TDF monotherapy and during subsequent combination therapies. Three HBsAg kinetic patterns were found in both the early and delayed groups, nonresponders (n = 4 and n = 4), monophasic (n = 11 and n = 11), and biphasic (n = 4 and n = 3), respectively. All participants who achieved a functional cure had a monophasic HBsAg kinetic pattern during triple therapy. Among participants with a monophasic HBsAg decline, those who had a functional cure had a shorter median time to HBsAg loss of 21 (interquartile range=11) weeks compared with those who did not achieve functional cure [median: 27 (7) weeks] (p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

Functional cure was associated with a rapid monophasic HBsAg decline during NAP-based therapy. A nonmonophasic HBsAg kinetic pattern had a 100% negative predictive value (NPV) for a functional cure.

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.

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.

Effect of entecavir and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on hepatocellular carcinoma in subjects with chronic hepatitis B: a meta-analysis

Background

A meta-analysis was made to assess the impact of entecavir comparison with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate as nucleos(t)ide analogue on hepatic cellular carcinoma (HCC). The study had subjects with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV). Systemic research was done for all studies concerned with our topic till the date (March 2022). We included 19 studies in which 27,618 subjects participated. All subjects included were diagnosed with chronic HBV at the beginning of the study. A total of 15,734 subjects from the overall 27,618 were medicated with entecavir; however, 11,884 subjects were on tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) with confidence intervals (CIs) of 95% to evaluate the impact of entecavir and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on HCC in subjects with chronic HBV by applying a dichotomous approach with a random or fixed-effect model.

Results

Chronic HBV subjects treated with entecavir showed a higher significant biochemical response than those treated with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.21–1.60, at p < 0.001). Also, no significant difference was detected with entecavir compared to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate concerning the occurrence of hepatic cells cancer (OR 1.26; 95% CI 0.96–1.67, p = 0.10), virological response (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.63–1.25, p = 0.49), and seroconversion (OR 1.27; 95% CI 0.76–2.14, p = 0.37).

Conclusions

The use of entecavir resulted in a significantly higher biochemical response; nevertheless, it did not show any significant variation concerning the occurrence of hepatic cancer, virological response, or serological conversion compared to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in chronic HBV subjects. So, results interpretation needs to be carried out carefully owing to the limited number of studies included in specific comparisons, e.g., serological conversion.

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

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.

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.

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.

Chronic Hepatitis B Infection with Low Level Viremia Correlates with the Progression of the Liver Disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Currently, insufficient clinical data are available to address whether low-level viremia (LLV) observed during antiviral treatment will adversely affect the clinical outcome or whether treatment strategies should be altered if LLV occurs. This study compared the clinical outcomes of patients with a maintained virological response (MVR) and patients who experienced LLV and their treatment strategies.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of 674 patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection who received antiviral treatment for more than 12 months was analyzed for the development of end-stage liver disease and treatment strategies during the follow-up period. End-stage liver disease included decompensated liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

RESULTS

During a median 42-month follow-up, end-stage liver disease developed more frequently in patients who experienced LLV than in those who experienced MVR (7.73% and 15.85% vs. 0.77% and 5.52% at 5 and 10 years, respectively; p=0.000). The trend was consistent after propensity score matching. In the high-risk group of four HCC risk models, LLV patients had a higher risk of HCC development (p<0.05). By Cox proportional hazard model analysis, LLV was an independent risk factor for end-stage liver disease and HCC (hazard ratio [HR]=6.280, confidence interval [CI]=2.081-18.951, p=0.001; HR=5.108, CI=1.392-18.737, respectively; p=0.014). Patients achieved a lower rate of end-stage liver disease by adjusting treatment compared to continuing the original treatment once LLV occurred (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

LLV is an independent risk factor for end-stage liver disease and HCC, and treatment adjustments can be considered.

Low-level viremia in nucleoside analog-treated chronic hepatitis B patients

ABSTRACT

Low-level viremia (LLV) was defined as persistent or intermittent episodes of detectable hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA (<2000 IU/mL, detection limit of 10 IU/mL) after 48 weeks of antiviral treatment. Effective antiviral therapies for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients, such as entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), have been shown to inhibit the replication of HBV DNA and prevent liver-related complications. However, even with long-term antiviral therapy, there are still a number of patients with persistent or intermittent LLV. At present, the research on LLV to address whether adversely affect the clinical outcome is limited, and the follow-up treatment for these patients is open to question. At the same time, the mechanism of LLV is not clear. In this review, we summarize the incidence of LLV, the association between LLV and long-term outcomes, possible mechanisms, and management strategies in these patient populations.

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.

Putative Repurposing of Lamivudine, a Nucleoside/Nucleotide Analogue and Antiretroviral to Improve the Outcome of Cancer and COVID-19 Patients

Lamivudine, also widely known as 3TC belongs to a family of nucleotide/nucleoside analogues of cytidine or cytosine that inhibits the Reverse Transcriptase (RT) of retroviruses such as HIV. Lamivudine is currently indicated in combination with other antiretroviral agents for the treatment of HIV-1 infection or for chronic Hepatitis B (HBV) virus infection associated with evidence of hepatitis B viral replication and active liver inflammation. HBV reactivation in patients with HBV infections who receive anticancer chemotherapy can be a life-threatening complication during and after the completion of chemotherapy. Lamivudine is used, as well as other antiretrovirals, to prevent the reactivation of the Hepatitis B virus during and after chemotherapy. In addition, Lamivudine has been shown to sensitize cancer cells to chemotherapy. Lamivudine and other similar analogues also have direct positive effects in the prevention of cancer in hepatitis B or HIV positive patients, independently of chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Recently, it has been proposed that Lamivudine might be also repurposed against SARS-CoV-2 in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this review we first examine recent reports on the re-usage of Lamivudine or 3TC against the SARS-CoV-2, and we present docking evidence carried out in silico suggesting that Lamivudine may bind and possibly work as an inhibitor of the SARS-CoV-2 RdRp RNA polymerase. We also evaluate and propose assessment of repurposing Lamivudine as anti-SARS-CoV-2 and anti-COVID-19 antiviral. Secondly, we summarize the published literature on the use of Lamivudine or (3TC) before or during chemotherapy to prevent reactivation of HBV, and examine reports of enhanced effectiveness of radiotherapy in combination with Lamivudine treatment against the cancerous cells or tissues. We show that the anti-cancer properties of Lamivudine are well established, whereas its putative anti-COVID effect is under investigation. The side effects of lamivudine and the appearance of resistance to 3TC are also discussed.

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.

Outcomes of Sequential Therapy With Tenofovir Alafenamide After Long-term Entecavir

INTRODUCTION

Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) are both first-line hepatitis B virus (HBV) therapies, but ETV-to-TAF switch outcome data are limited. We aimed to assess outcomes up to 96 weeks after ETV-to-TAF switch.

METHODS

ETV-treated (≥12 months) chronic hepatitis B patients switched to TAF in routine practice at 15 centers (United States, Korea, Japan, and Taiwan) were included. Primary outcome was complete viral suppression (CVS) rate (HBV DNA <20 IU/mL).

RESULTS

We analyzed 425 eligible patients (mean age 60.7 ± 13.2 years, 60% men, 90.8% Asian, 20.7% with diabetes, 27% with hypertension, 14.8% with cirrhosis, 8.3% with hepatocellular carcinoma, and mean ETV duration before switch 6.16 ± 3.17 years). The mean baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 89 ± 19 (chronic kidney disease [CKD] stages: 55.6% stage 1, 35.7% stage 2, and 8.8% stages 3-5). CVS rate increased from 91.90% at switch (from 90.46% 24 weeks before switch) to 95.57% and 97.21% at 48 and 96 weeks after (P = 0.03 and 0.02, respectively). Over the 96 weeks after switch, mean HBV DNA (P < 0.001) but not alanine aminotransferase or CKD stage decreased. Between switch and 96-week follow-up, 11% (26/235) of CKD stage 1 patients migrated to stage 2 and 8% (12/151) of stage 2 patients to stages 3-5, whereas 18% (27/151) from stage 2 to 1, and 19% (7/37) from stages 3-5 to 2. On multivariable generalized estimated equation analysis adjusted for age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, and cirrhosis, baseline eGFR, age (P < 0.001), and CKD stages 2 and 3-5 (vs 1) (both P < 0.001) were associated with lower follow-up eGFR.

DISCUSSION

After an average of 6 years on ETV, CVS increased from 91.9% at TAF switch to 97.2% at 96 weeks later.

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.

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.

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

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

Comparison of the impact of tenofovir alafenamide and entecavir on declines of hepatitis B surface antigen levels

OBJECTIVE

Tenofovir alafenamide is a new prodrug of tenofovir that allows for the treatment of patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) at a lower dose than with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, due to the more efficient delivery of tenofovir to hepatocytes. In this study, we compared entecavir and tenofovir alafenamide in terms of their ability to reduce hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) in the same group of patients with HBV infection.

METHODS

During March and June 2018, 129 patients who received entecavir were switched to tenofovir alafenamide. Every 3- 6 months for 1 year before and after switching to tenofovir alafenamide, all patients underwent measurements of HBsAg, hepatitis core-related antigen (HBcrAg), calcium (Ca), inorganic phosphorus, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).

RESULTS

The percent decline rate during the entecavir and tenofovir alafenamide phases at 6 months were 2.38% (-3.57 to 0.00) and -3.57% (-7.14 to 0.00), respectively, and those at 12 months were 3.03% (-6.57 to 0.00) and -5.56% (-7.41 to -2.50), respectively. HBsAg levels were reduced significantly more during the tenofovir alafenamide phase than during the entecavir phase (P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the percent declines of HBcrAg, Ca, inorganic phosphorus, or eGFR during the entecavir and tenofovir alafenamide phases after 1 year.

CONCLUSION

tenofovir alafenamide significantly decreased HBsAg levels compared to entecavir.

Hepatocellular carcinoma incidence with tenofovir versus entecavir in chronic hepatitis B: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and entecavir differ in their association with risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B, and previous meta-analyses have shown conflicting conclusions with substantial heterogeneity. We aimed to analyse the updated data and elucidate the source of heterogeneity.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library for relevant studies with time-to-event data for incident hepatocellular carcinoma occurring in patients with chronic hepatitis B who received tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or entecavir monotherapy with follow-up of at least 1 year. Studies published between Jan 1, 2006, and April 17, 2020, and abstracts from international conferences in 2018 and 2019 were included. We pooled covariate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for hepatocellular carcinoma using a random-effects model, assessed heterogeneity among included studies using the I2 statistic and Cochran's Q test, and identified the source of heterogeneity using prespecified subgroup analyses. This study is registered with PROSPERO, ID CRD42020176513.

FINDINGS

31 studies involving 119 053 patients were analysed. The 5-year cumulative incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma was 5·97% (95% CI 5·81-6·13, 28 studies) for entecavir and 3·06% (2·86-3·26, 13 studies) for tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in studies with unmatched populations (p<0·0001). For all eight studies matched by propensity score, the 5-year cumulative incidence was 3·44% (95% CI 3·08-3·80) for entecavir and 3·39% (2·94-3·83) for tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (p=0·87). Analysis of 14 comparative studies with covariate adjustment found that tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and entecavir had similar risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (primary outcome); adjusted HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·73-1·07; p=0·20), although heterogeneity was significant (I2=56·4%, p=0·0038). In a subgroup analysis for hospital-based clinical cohorts, there was no difference in hepatocellular carcinoma incidence between the two regimens (adjusted HR 1·03, 95% CI 0·88-1·21; I2=0%). However, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was associated with a lower risk of hepatocellular carcinoma compared with entecavir in administrative database research (adjusted HR 0·67, 0·59-0·76; I2=0%).

INTERPRETATION

Our study found no significant difference between tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and entecavir in their association with incident hepatocellular carcinoma. We suggest that treatment should be guided by patient tolerability and affordability rather than whether one drug is more effective than the other.

FUNDING

Supported in part by E-DA Hospital (EDAHP 106008; EDAHP 103046).

Similar risk of hepatocellular carcinoma during long-term entecavir or tenofovir therapy in Caucasian patients with chronic hepatitis B

BACKGROUND & AIMS

A recent study in Asian patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) reported that the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was lower in patients treated with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) than entecavir (ETV), but this finding remains controversial. We aimed to identify any differences in HCC incidence, or other patient outcomes, between patients receiving TDF or ETV in the well monitored, multicenter European PAGE-B cohort.

METHODS

We included 1,935 Caucasians with CHB, with or without compensated cirrhosis, treated with ETV (n = 772) or TDF (n = 1,163) monotherapy. Mean follow-up was 7.1 ± 3.0 years from ETV/TDF onset.

RESULTS

The 5-year cumulative HCC incidence was 5.4% in ETV- and 6.0% in TDF-treated patients (log-rank, p = 0.321), with no significant difference in any patient subgroup (with or without cirrhosis, naïve or experienced to oral antiviral(s) [total, with or without cirrhosis]). In multivariable Cox regression analyses, the hazard of HCC was similar between ETV- and TDF-treated patients after adjustment for several HCC risk factors. ETV- and TDF-treated patients had similar rates of on-therapy biochemical and virological remission, HBsAg loss, liver transplantation and/or death. Elastographic reversion of cirrhosis at year 5 (liver stiffness <12 kPa) was observed in 245/347 (70.6%) patients with pretreatment cirrhosis, being more frequent in TDF- than ETV- treated patients (73.8% vs. 61.5%, p = 0.038).

CONCLUSION

In Caucasian patients with CHB, with or without cirrhosis, long-term ETV or TDF monotherapy is associated with similar HCC risk, rates of biochemical/virological remission, HBsAg loss and liver transplantation or death, but elastographic reversion of cirrhosis at year 5 was more frequent with TDF.

LAY SUMMARY

In a large cohort of Caucasians with chronic hepatitis B treated with entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy, cumulative rates of hepatocellular carcinoma did not differ (up to 12 years). Nor did rates of biochemical/virological remission, HBsAg loss and liver transplantation or death. However, elastographic reversion of cirrhosis at year 5 was more frequent in TDF- than ETV-treated patients with pretreatment cirrhosis.

Comparison of tenofovir versus entecavir on reducing incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Studies had shown that tenofovir (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) are widely used as the first-line therapy to inhibit hepatitis B virus replication, which can reduce the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients, but it was unclear which nucleos(t)ide analogue was most effective. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis and a systematic review to compare the incidence of HCC in CHB patients who are either on TDF or ETV.

METHODS

For this study, the following databases were searched for clinical trials published from its inception until November 2019: PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library.

RESULTS

A total of 11 eligible studies were selected, including 70 864 patients. The meta-analysis showed that TDF was superior to ETV with regard to the incidence of HCC, the incidence of death or transplantation, and virologic response. There were no significant differences in terms of biochemical response and loss of seroconversion response among the entire cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

The conclusion was that CHB patients treated with TDF had a reduced incidence of HCC compared with patients treated with ETV.

Hepatocellular carcinoma and death and transplantation in chronic hepatitis B treated with entecavir or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate

Conflicting results have been reported regarding which of entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is associated with better outcomes. Chronic hepatitis B patients who started ETV or TDF between 2010 and 2015 were analysed. The primary outcomes were hepatocellular carcinoma and death and transplantation. The impact of the treatment on the primary outcomes was analysed using Cox proportional hazards models in the entire and propensity score-matched cohorts. A total of 404 patients (180 and 224 in the ETV and TDF groups, respectively) were analysed. The median duration of follow-up was significantly longer in the ETV group (64.0 vs. 49.1 months; P < 0.001). Virological response (79.4% vs. 68.4%; P = 0.018) and sustained virological suppression (59.7% vs. 45.2%; P = 0.005) were significantly higher in the TDF group. TDF was associated with lower hepatocellular carcinoma [hazard ratio (HR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.12‒0.79; P = 0.014]; however, statistical significance was not reached after adjusting sustained virological suppression using propensity score matching (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.12‒1.14; P = 0.08). Death and transplantation was comparable. In conclusion, the impact of TDF on the lower hepatocellular carcinoma was blunted after adjusting sustained virological suppression. Further comparison in a larger number of patients who show sustained virological suppression over a longer period of time is needed.

Tenofovir Treatment Has Lower Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma than Entecavir Treatment in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Tenofovir (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) are both equally recommended as first-line treatments for patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). They have comparable efficacy in virologic response, but their effect on the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in CHB is controversial. Therefore, we aimed to compare TDF and ETV evaluating the risk of HCC development in CHB patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted up to November 2019 in MEDLINE/PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases without language and time restrictions. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models were used to estimate combined hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Seven studies containing 35,785 participants were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled HR (95% CI) of HCC in the patients who used TDF versus patients who used ETV was 0.75 (0.56-0.96). There was no significant heterogeneity detected among the included studies results (I² = 47.5%). There was no significant publication bias detected among the included studies (Begg's p = 0.88 and Egger's regression test p = 0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence to date suggests that TDF treatment is associated with significantly fewer cases of HCC when compared to ETV.

Tenofovir versus entecavir in lowering the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma development in patients with chronic hepatitis B: a critical systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists on whether tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is superior to entecavir (ETV) in lowering the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development. This meta-analysis was performed to clarify this issue with critical clinical and methodological considerations.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to Oct 28, 2019. Randomized control trials and observational studies reporting the impact of TDF and ETV on the risk of HCC in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) were eligible. Risk ratios (RRs) calculated with cumulative incidence rate and/or annual incidence rate, or hazard ratio (HR) were pooled using random-effect models. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess the potential impact of between-study level and within-study level factors.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies with 78,136 CHB patients were included. Overall cumulative incidence rate of HCC was lower in TDF group than ETV group (3.07% vs. 5.25%; RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.42-0.72). However, this difference was not statistically significant in pooled results of hazard ratio (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.73-1.04) and RR calculated with annual incidence rate (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.67-1.16). Potential confounding factors at between-study level included prior nucleos(t)ide usage, disease stage at baseline and region of study. More importantly, at within-study level, disparity in follow-up duration between TDF and ETV groups may impact the result, usually favoring a treatment with shorter follow-up duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with ETV, TDF treatment tended to have a lower overall cumulative incidence rate of HCC. However, disparity in follow-up duration may be a key factor to influence the result.

Towards the worldwide eradication of hepatitis B virus infection: A combination of prophylactic and therapeutic factors

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is still a global health problem, mostly because of the intermediate/high rates of HBV chronic carriers living in most Asian, African and eastern European countries. The universal HBV vaccination of new-borns undertaken in most nations over the last 3 decades and effective HBV antiviral treatments (nucleos(t)ide analogue with high genetic barrier to viral resistance) introduced in the last decade have shown their beneficial effects in inducing a clear reduction of HBV endemicity in the countries where they have been extensively applied. Great hopes are now placed on new antiviral and immunotherapeutic drugs that are now at an advanced stage of study. It is in fact already conceivable that the synergistic use of new drugs targeting more than one HBV-lifecycle steps (covalent closed circular DNA destruction/silencing, HBV entry inhibitors, nucleocapsid assembly modulators targeting viral transcripts) and of some new immunotherapeutic agents might eliminate the intrahepatic covalent closed circular DNA and achieve the eradication of HBV infection. In spite of this, a strong effort should be given to extensive educational and screening programs for the at-risk population and to the implementation of HBV vaccination in developing countries.