Monotherapy with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for multiple drug-resistant chronic hepatitis B: 3-year trial

Entecavir for children and adults with chronic hepatitis B

RATIONALE

Chronic hepatitis B is a major worldwide public health concern. Entecavir, one nucleos(t)ide analogue antiviral therapy option, is recommended as the first-line drug for chronic hepatitis B in many clinical guidelines. However, none of the guideline recommendations are based on the findings of a systematic review with meta-analysis, where entecavir versus no treatment or placebo are compared directly.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of entecavir versus no treatment or placebo in children and adults with chronic hepatitis B, who are either hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg)-positive or HBeAg-negative.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, three other databases, online trial registries, and reference lists, and contacted authors. The latest search was on 19 July 2024.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials comparing entecavir versus no treatment or placebo in children or adults, or both, with chronic hepatitis B, and irrespective of treatment history with other antiviral drugs and other viral co-infections. We allowed co-interventions when administered equally to all intervention groups.

OUTCOMES

The outcomes reported in this abstract and in the summary of findings table are all-cause mortality, health-related quality of life, and proportion of people with serious adverse events at the longest follow-up.

RISK OF BIAS

We used the Cochrane RoB 2 tool to assess risk of bias in the included trials.

SYNTHESIS METHODS

We used a random-effects model to meta-analyse outcome results, where possible, and presented the results as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Where there was considerable heterogeneity, we performed a narrative analysis. We used a fixed-effect model for sensitivity analysis. We used GRADE to evaluate the certainty of evidence.

INCLUDED STUDIES

We included 22 randomised clinical trials (published from 2005 to 2022) with 2940 participants diagnosed with chronic hepatitis B. All trials had a parallel-group design. The experimental intervention was oral entecavir, with a follow-up duration of 5 weeks to 228 weeks. The comparator in 12 trials was no treatment, and in 10 trials was placebo. Fourteen trials equally administered co-interventions to the trial participants in the entecavir and no treatment and placebo groups. One trial included participants between 14 years and 55 years of age, one trial included only children, 19 trials included only adults, and one trial did not provide the age of participants.

SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS

Twenty trials contributed data to the quantitative analysis. Ten trials (1379 participants) reported all-cause mortality with a mean follow-up duration of 48.9 weeks (range 5 to 100 weeks). The result was not estimable because no deaths occurred in any of the entecavir and no treatment or placebo groups. None of the trials provided data on health-related quality of life. We are very uncertain about the effect of entecavir versus no treatment or placebo on the proportion of people with serious adverse events (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.32; absolute risk difference 22 fewer per 1000 (from 44 fewer to 21 more); 15 trials, 1676 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The mean follow-up duration was 58.4 weeks (range 5 weeks to 228 weeks). We downgraded the certainty of evidence for these outcomes to very low, mainly because the overall risk of bias in most trials was with some concerns or high, and serious imprecision (no events or few events).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the issues of risk of bias and insufficient power of the included trials and the very low certainty of the available evidence, we could not determine the effect of entecavir versus no treatment or placebo on critical outcomes such as all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. There is a lack of data on health-related quality of life. Given the first-line recommendation and wide usage of entecavir in people with chronic hepatitis B, further evidence on clinically important outcomes, analysed in this review, is needed.

FUNDING

This Cochrane review had no dedicated funding.

REGISTRATION

Registration: Entecavir for children and adults with chronic hepatitis B, CD015536 via DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD015536.

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.

Tenofovir Alafenamide for Drug-Resistant Hepatitis B: A Randomized Trial for Switching From Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It remains unknown whether tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) could replace tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in patients with drug-resistant hepatitis B virus (HBV).

METHODS

In this multicenter randomized non-inferiority trial, 174 patients with HBV resistant to multiple drugs (lamivudine, entecavir, and/or adefovir) under TDF monotherapy for ≥96 weeks were randomized 1:1 to switch to TAF (n = 87) or continue TDF (n = 87) for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was proportion of patients with HBV DNA <60 IU/mL at week 48.

RESULTS

At baseline, 84 and 80 patients had HBV DNA <60 IU/mL in the TAF and TDF groups, respectively. At week 48, the proportion of patients with HBV DNA <60 IU/mL was 98.9% (86/87) in TAF group, showing non-inferiority to TDF group (97.7%, 85/87; difference, 1.1%; 95% confidence interval, -2.7% to 5.0%). Changes in median alanine aminotransferase at week 48 from baseline were statistically different between TAF and TDF groups (-3 IU/L vs +2 IU/L; P = .02). TAF group showed a statistically greater increase in bone mineral density at spine (+1.84% vs +0.08%; P = .01) and numerically higher increase in mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (+8.2% vs +4.5%; P = .06) compared with TDF group. Compared with TDF group, TAF group showed significantly greater increases in mean body weight (0.71 vs -0.37 kg; P = .01) and total, low-density lipoprotein, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (P < .001 for all) at week 48 from baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

TAF could be substituted for TDF in patients with multidrug-resistant HBV for improved bone and renal safety without a loss of efficacy. However, increases in body weight and cholesterol levels with TAF treatment would be a concern. ClinicalTrials.gov no.: NCT03241641.

Effectiveness of tenofovir alafenamide for chronic hepatitis B patients with a poor response to the previously used nucleos(t)ide analogs

BACKGROUND

Few studies have demonstrated the potency of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) in patients with poor response to other nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study comprising consecutive 40 patients exhibiting a poor response to other NAs, who subsequently received TAF-containing regimens. The primary outcome was the prevalence of virological response (VR) at each time and maintained virological response (MVR) under TAF-containing regimens until week 96.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, the prevalence of MVR was 71.1% (27/38). Further, poor tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) response was significantly associated with a lower prevalence of MVR (p = 0.014). In TDF-naïve patients, the prevalence of MVR was 92.3% (12/13) and 62.5% (5/8) in patients with lamivudine resistance (LAM-r) and entecavir resistance (ETV-r), respectively. Further, viral load and HBeAg status at baseline were associated with a lower prevalence of MVR (p = 0.013). Among the seven patients with prior TDF exposure, 2 patients achieved MVR. Among them, one patient with development of viral breakthrough during TDF/LAM achieved MVR after switching to TAF/ETV. In contrast, one of the five patients with non-MVR had three substitutions (rtS106C, rtD134N/S, and rtL269I) of quadruple mutations in addition to ETV-r. Other patients with rtA181T + rtN236T also could not achieve MVR.

CONCLUSION

TAF exhibited high antiviral potency in patients with LAM-r and ETV-r. However, TAF potency was associated with previous TDF response, viral load, and HBeAg status at baseline. Additionally, a quadruple mutation may impact tenofovir resistance; however, further studies are needed to verify this.

Guidelines for Prevention and Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B

To achieve the goal of the World Health Organization to eliminate viral hepatitis as a major public health threat by 2030, the Chinese Society of Infectious Diseases and the Chinese Society of Hepatology convened an expert panel in 2019 to update the guidelines for the prevention and treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB). The current guidelines cover recent advances in basic, clinical, and preventive studies of CHB infection and consider the actual situation in China. These guidelines are intended to provide support for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of CHB.

Efficacy of different nucleoside analog rescue therapies for entecavir-resistant chronic hepatitis B patients

BACKGROUND

Entecavir (ETV) is recommended as a first-line anti-HBV treatment. However, many chronic hepatitis B patients initiate anti-HBV treatment such as lamivudine and telbivudine with low genetic barriers in China, which leads to compensatory mutations and increases the rate of ETV resistance. The management of ETV resistance in China is an essential clinical issue.

METHODS

Patients from 2011 to 2017 with nucleos(t)ide analog resistance were screened and 72 patients with ETV resistance were included. These patients received different rescue therapies including an ETV and adefovir (ADV) combination therapy group (n = 25), a tenofovir (TDF) monotherapy group (n = 27), and an ETV and TDF combination therapy group (n = 20). Virologic, biochemical, and serologic responses were compared among the three groups.

RESULTS

The rate of ETV resistance among all HBV-resistant variants increased from 6.04% in 2011 to 15.02% in 2017. TDF monotherapy and TDF combination groups showed similar rates of negative HBV DNA at 48 weeks (74.07% vs 70.00%, P > 0.05), while the ETV and ADV group showed the worst virologic response (28.00%). Also, TDF monotherapy and TDF combination therapy showed similar decline of HBV DNA at weeks 12, 24, and 48. There was no significant difference in the rates of HBeAg clearance, ALT normalization, and abnormal renal function among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TDF monotherapy showed a comparable virologic response to TDF and ETV combination therapy and a better virologic response than ETV and ADV combination therapy. Thus, TDF monotherapy is the preferred rescue therapy for ETV resistance.

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B patients with failure to preceding treatments: A nationwide cohort study

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy is recommended for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients who are refractory to other drugs. Yet, little data are available for the effectiveness of TDF monotherapy compared with TDF-based combination therapy on the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and death/transplantation. This nationwide population-based cohort study included 11,289 CHB patients who initiated TDF rescue therapy after failure of preceding treatments between 2012 and 2014 in Korea. The risks of HCC and death/transplantation were compared between TDF combotherapy (n = 2,499) and TDF monotherapy (n = 8,790) groups. The findings were validated in a hospital cohort of 1,163 CHB patients. In the nationwide cohort, during 44.2 months of overall treatment duration, 529 patients developed HCC and 190 died or received transplantation. In the 2,499 propensity score-matched pairs, compared with TDF combotherapy, TDF monotherapy showed no significantly different risks of HCC (1.11/100 person-year [PY] vs. 1.32/100 PY; HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95-1.60, p = .12) and death/transplant (0.43/100 PY vs. 0.42/100 PY; HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.67-1.60, p = .87). However, in the 469 propensity score-matched pairs of cirrhosis subcohort, TDF monotherapy was associated with a higher risk of HCC than TDF combotherapy (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.002-2.12, p = .049). In the validation hospital cohort, TDF monotherapy was not associated with significantly different risks of HCC and death/transplant in the entire cohort and cirrhosis subcohort. In CHB patients with failure to preceding treatments, TDF monotherapy showed no higher risks of HCC and death/transplantation compared with TDF combotherapy. However, the comparative effectiveness of rescue TDF monotherapy should be further clarified in cirrhotic patients since the findings were not consistent in the nationwide and hospital cohorts.

APASL guidance on stopping nucleos(t)ide analogues in chronic hepatitis B patients

Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is currently incurable. Long-term treatment with potent and safe nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) can reduce hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cirrhosis-related complications through profound viral suppression. However, indefinite therapy raises several crucial issues with pros and cons. Because seroclearance of hepatitis B surface (HBsAg) as functional cure is not easily achievable, a finite therapy including sequential 48-week pegylated interferon therapy may provide an opportunity to facilitate HBsAg seroclearance by the rejuvenation of exhausted immune cells. However, the cost of stopping NA is the high incidence of virological relapse and surge of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels, which may increase the risk of adverse outcomes (e.g., decompensation, fibrosis progression, HCC, or liver-related mortality). So far, the APASL criteria to stop NA treatment is undetectable HBV DNA levels with normalization of ALT; however, this criterion for cessation of treatment is associated with various incidence rates of virological/clinical relapse and more than 40% of NA-stoppers eventually receive retreatment. A very intensive follow-up strategy and identification of low-risk patients for virological/clinical relapse by different biomarkers are the keys to stop the NA treatment safely. Recent studies suggested that decreasing HBsAg level at the end-of-treatment to < 100-200 IU/mL seems to be a useful marker for deciding when to discontinue NAs therapy. In addition, several viral and host factors have been reviewed for their potential roles in predicting clinical relapse. Finally, the APASL guidance has proposed rules to stop NA and the subsequent follow-up strategy to achieve a better prognosis after stopping NA. In general, for both HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative patients who have stopped treatment, these measurements should be done every 1-3 months at the minimum until 12 months.

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.

Continuing besifovir dipivoxil maleate versus switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for treatment of chronic hepatitis B: Results of 192-week phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Besifovir dipivoxil maleate (BSV), an acyclic nucleotide phosphonate, shows potent antiviral activity against hepatitis B virus. Our previous 48-week trial revealed that BSV has comparable antiviral efficacy to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and better safety profiles in terms of improved renal and bone safety. This extension study evaluated the prolonged efficacy and safety of BSV in treatment-naive chronic hepatitis B patients.

METHODS

Patients continued to participate in an open-label BSV study after an initial 48-week double-blind comparison of BSV and TDF treatment. The antiviral efficacy and drug safety was evaluated up to 192 weeks in two groups: patients continuing BSV treatment (BSV-BSV) and patients switching from TDF to BSV after 48 weeks (TDF-BSV).

RESULTS

Among 197 patients receiving randomized treatments, 170 (86%) entered the open-label phase and 152 (77%) entered the 192-week extension study. Virological response rates over 192 weeks were 92.50% and 93.06% in the BSV-BSV and TDF-BSV groups, respectively (P=0.90). Hepatitis B envelop antigen seroconversion and alanine aminotransferase normalization rates were similar between the groups (P=0.75 and P=0.36, respectively). There were no drug-resistant mutations to BSV. Bone mineral density and renal function were well preserved in the BSV-BSV group, whereas these initially worsened then recovered after switching therapy in the TDF-BSV group.

CONCLUSION

BSV maintained potent antiviral efficacy after 192 weeks and showed no evidence of drug resistance. BSV was safe, well tolerated, and effective in patients who switched from TDF to BSV. Trial Registration Number: NCT01937806 (date: 10 Sep 2013).

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of antiviral regimens for entecavir-resistant hepatitis B: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients who had exposed to lamivudine (LAM) and telbivudine (LdT) had high risk of developing entecavir (ETV)-resistance after long-term treatment. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and a network meta-analysis on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness on antiviral regimens in CHB patients with ETV-resistance.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science for studies on nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) treatment [including tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-based rescue therapies, adefovir (ADV)-based rescue therapies and double-dose ETV therapy] in CHB patients with ETV-resistance. The network meta-analysis was conducted for 1-year complete virological response (CVR) and biological response (BR) rates using GeMTC and ADDIS. A cost-effective analysis was conducted to select an economic and effective treatment regimen based on the 1-year CVR rate.

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies were finally included in this analysis. The antiviral efficacy was estimated. On network meta-analysis, the 1-year CVR rate in ETV-TDF [odds ratio (OR)  = 22.30; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 2.78-241.93], LAM-TDF (OR  = 70.67; 95 % CI: 5.16-1307.45) and TDF (OR  = 16.90; 95 % CI: 2.28-186.30) groups were significantly higher than that in the ETV double-dose group; the 1-year CVR rate in the LAM-TDF group (OR  = 14.82; 95 % CI: 1.03-220.31) was significantly higher than that in the LAM/LdT-ADV group. The 1-year BR rate of ETV-TDF (OR = 28.68; 95 % CI: 1.70-1505.08) and TDF (OR = 21.79; 95 % CI: 1.43-1070.09) therapies were significantly higher than that of ETV double-dose therapy. TDF-based therapies had the highest possibility to achieve the CVR and BR at 1 year, in which LAM-TDF combined therapy was the most effective regimen. The ratio of cost/effectiveness for 1-year treatment was 8 526, 17 649, 20 651 Yuan in the TDF group, TDF-ETV group, and ETV-ADV group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

TDF-based combined therapies such as ETV-TDF and LAM-TDF therapies were the first-line treatment if financial condition is allowed.

Tenofovir-based combination therapy or monotherapy for multidrug-resistant chronic hepatitis B: Long-term data from a multicenter cohort study

The treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is challenging. Herein, we report a multicenter prospective cohort study for the evaluation of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-based therapy for MDR CHB in a real-life setting. The inclusion criteria comprised patients with resistance to more than two nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA) classes and hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA level of ≥200 IU/mL. The primary end-point was virologic response (VR), defined as undetectable HBV DNA (<20 IU/mL) after 60 months. A total of 236 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean HBV DNA level was 4.16 ± 1.44 log IU/mL; 26.7% of patients had liver cirrhosis. Before the initiation of TDF, 33.5%, 44.9% and 21.6% of patients had mutations resistant to L-NA + adefovir, L-NA + entecavir (ETV) and L-NA + adefovir + ETV, respectively. A total of 184 patients received TDF-based combination therapy [TDF + ETV (n = 178) or TDF + L-NA (n = 6)], and 52 patients received TDF monotherapy. In the entire cohort, the VR rates were 77.2%, 89.9% and 92.2% at 12, 36 and 60 months, respectively. The VR rates were not significantly different between the combination therapy and the monotherapy group after 12 (76.2% vs 80.4%, P = .533), 36 (89.8% vs 90.3%, P = 1.000) or 60 (92.9% vs 87.5%, P = .499) months. Also, there was no significant difference in the cumulative VR rates for 5 years between the treatment groups (P = .910). Newly developed antiviral resistance was not observed. TDF-based therapy was effective for the treatment of MDR CHB. The efficacy of TDF monotherapy was not different from that of the TDF-based combination therapy.

Entecavir resistance mutations rtL180M/T184L/M204V combined with rtA200V lead to tenofovir resistance

BACKGROUND

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) imposes a high genetic barrier to drug resistance and potently inhibits replication of multidrug-resistant hepatitis B virus. Few clinical cases with confirmed TDF-resistance have been reported to date.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Here, we report viral rebound in a patient with chronic hepatitis B who underwent TDF monotherapy and harboured a quadruple mutant consisting of classic entecavir (ETV)-resistance mutations (rtL180M/T184L/M204V) together with an rtA200V mutation in the reverse transcriptase gene. Sequencing analysis revealed that this quadruple mutant emerged as a major viral population. In vitro phenotyping demonstrated that the rtL180M/T184L/A200V/M204V mutant had moderate resistance to TDF treatment, with a 4.52-fold higher half maximal effective concentration than that of wild-type virus. Importantly, this patient with TDF resistance achieved virological suppression after TDF/ETV combination rescue therapy.

CONCLUSION

An rtL180M/T184L/A200V/M204V mutant with moderate resistance to TDF monotherapy was selected during sequential nucleoside analogue (NA) treatment in a stepwise manner. ETV/TDF combination therapy effectively suppressed replication of this TDF-resistant mutant. Our studies provide novel insights into the treatment of NA-naïve patients as well as patients with TDF resistance.

The risk of hepatocellular carcinoma among chronic hepatitis B virus-infected patients outside current treatment criteria

We assessed the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in those outside of current treatment recommendations and risk factors associated with HCC development. A multi-centre, retrospective cohort of 3624 patients who were monitored without antiviral treatment was analysed. Incident HCC risk according to the Asian Pacific Association for the study of the Liver (APASL), the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease (AASLD) and the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) treatment recommendations was assessed. A risk score was developed using independent factors associated with HCC development among patients who were outside current treatment criteria. During a median follow-up of 4.6 years, incident HCC was diagnosed in 161 (4.4%) patients. The proportions of patients who developed HCC outside treatment recommendation according to APASL, AASLD and EASL criteria were 64.0%, 46.0% and 33.5%, respectively. The 5-year cumulative HCC incidence rate was 13.9% for cirrhotic patients with low-level viremia and 6.1 ~ 7.3% for chronic hepatitis patients with elevated HBV DNA levels plus mildly elevated alanine aminotransferase levels. Among patients who were outside treatment recommendation, age, sex, hepatitis B e antigen, cirrhosis, alanine aminotransferase and platelet levels were independent factors associated with HCC development. When these factors were used to calculate the risk score for each patient, those with a score ≥8 had a higher HCC incidence rate (14.3% at 5-year), although they were currently outside treatment recommendations. Thus, HCC was observed among patients who were outside current treatment criteria indicating that careful monitoring for HCC and efforts to identify patients at risk are required.

Efficacy and safety of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in Chinese patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection: A 2-year prospective study

To date, a small number of studies concerning the effects and safety of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in Chinese individuals were conducted. In this study, we aimed to assess the antiviral effects and nephrotoxicity of TDF in Chinese patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection.Patients with chronic HBV infection were prospectively recruited and TDF treatment was given for 96 weeks. HBV serologic markers, HBV DNA, creatinine and phosphorus were collected.Fifty-seven treatment-naïve and 48 treatment-experienced patients were recruited. Irrespective of the prior treatment history, more than 95% of patients achieved virological response during 96 weeks treatment with TDF. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) significantly declined in the first year of treatment in patients with chronic hepatitis B or younger age (<65 years old) (both P < .05), while that was not achieved in patients with liver cirrhosis or older age (≥65 years old) (both P > .05). For patients who were treatment-naïve or treated previously with adefovir dipivoxil, eGFR declined at the 48th week; however, eGFR was partially recovered at the 96th week. Furthermore, multivariable analysis showed that basal eGFR <90 mL/min/1.73 m (P = .001; odds ratio: 4.821; 95% confidence interval: 1.904-12.206) is the only independent risk factor for eGFR <90 mL/min/1.73 m at the 96th week.TDF has potent antiviral effect in both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients.

Monotherapy with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for adefovir-resistant vs. entecavir-resistant chronic hepatitis B: A 5-year clinical trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy has displayed non-inferior efficacy to TDF plus entecavir (ETV) combination therapy in patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) resistant to ETV and/or adefovir (ADV). Nonetheless, the virologic response rate was suboptimal in patients receiving up to 144 weeks of TDF monotherapy. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of TDF monotherapy given for up to 240 weeks.

METHODS

One trial enrolled patients with ETV resistance without ADV resistance (n = 90), and another trial included patients with ADV resistance (n = 102). Most patients (91.2%) also had lamivudine resistance. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive TDF monotherapy or TDF + ETV combination therapy for 48 weeks, and then TDF monotherapy until week 240. We compared efficacy between the studies and safety in the pooled population at 240 weeks.

RESULTS

At week 240, the proportion of patients with serum HBV DNA <15 IU/ml was not significantly different between the ETV and ADV resistance groups in the full analysis set (84.4% vs. 73.5%; p = 0.07), which was significantly different by on-treatment analysis (92.7% vs. 79.8%; p = 0.02). Virologic blips associated with poor medication adherence occurred in 7 patients throughout the 240 weeks. None developed additional HBV resistance mutations. Among the 170 HBV e antigen (HBeAg)-positive patients at baseline, 12 (7.1%) achieved HBeAg seroconversion at week 240. None achieved HBV surface antigen seroclearance. Significant decreases from baseline were observed at week 240 in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (-3.21 ml/min/1.73 m² by the CKD-EPI equation, p <0.001) and bone mineral density (g/cm²) at the femur (-2.48%, p <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Up to 240 weeks of TDF monotherapy provided an increasing virologic response rate in heavily pretreated patients with HBV resistant to ETV and/or ADV. However, it was associated with poor serological responses and decreasing renal function and bone mineral density. (ClinicalTrials.gov No, NCT01639066 and NCT01639092).

LAY SUMMARY

In patients chronically infected with hepatitis B virus resistant to multiple drugs including lamivudine, entecavir, and/or adefovir, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy showed non-inferior efficacy compared with the combination therapy of TDF plus entecavir. Nonetheless, short-term TDF monotherapy was associated with suboptimal virologic response, and its long-term safety was uncertain. This study displayed that 240 weeks of TDF monotherapy provided a virologic response in most of those patients, but it was associated with poor serological responses and decreasing renal function and bone mineral density.

Identification of a quadruple mutation that confers tenofovir resistance in chronic hepatitis B patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is one the most potent nucleot(s)ide analogues for treating chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Phenotypic resistance caused by genotypic resistance to TDF has not been reported. This study aimed to characterize HBV mutations that confer tenofovir resistance.

METHODS

Two patients with viral breakthrough during treatment with TDF-containing regimens were prospectively enrolled. The gene encoding HBV reverse transcriptase was sequenced. Eleven HBV clones harboring a series of mutations in the reverse transcriptase gene were constructed by site-directed mutagenesis. Drug susceptibility of each clone was determined by Southern blot analysis and real-time PCR. The relative frequency of mutants was evaluated by ultra-deep sequencing and clonal analysis.

RESULTS

Five mutations (rtS106C [C], rtH126Y [Y], rtD134E [E], rtM204I/V, and rtL269I [I]) were commonly found in viral isolates from 2 patients. The novel mutations C, Y, and E were associated with drug resistance. In assays for drug susceptibility, the IC₅₀ value for wild-type HBV was 3.8 ± 0.6 µM, whereas the IC₅₀ values for CYE and CYEI mutants were 14.1 ± 1.8 and 58.1 ± 0.9 µM, respectively. The IC₉₀ value for wild-type HBV was 30 ± 0.5 µM, whereas the IC₉₀ values for CYE and CYEI mutants were 185 ± 0.5 and 790 ± 0.2 µM, respectively. Both tenofovir-resistant mutants and wild-type HBV had similar susceptibility to the capsid assembly modulator NVR 3-778 (IC₅₀ <0.4 µM vs. IC₅₀ = 0.4 µM, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reveals that the quadruple (CYEI) mutation increases the amount of tenofovir required to inhibit HBV by 15.3-fold in IC₅₀ and 26.3-fold in IC₉₀. These results demonstrate that tenofovir-resistant HBV mutants can emerge, although the genetic barrier is high.

LAY SUMMARY

Tenofovir is the most potent nucleotide analogue for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection and there has been no hepatitis B virus mutation that confers >10-fold resistance to tenofovir up to 8 years. Herein, we identified, for the first time, a quadruple mutation that conferred 15.3-fold (IC₅₀) and 26.3-fold (IC₉₀) resistance to tenofovir in 2 patients who experienced viral breakthrough during tenofovir treatment.

Long-term Efficacy of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Monotherapy for Multidrug-Resistant Chronic HBV infection

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There are no globally agreed upon treatment guidelines for patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) with multidrug resistance (MDR). We conducted a multicenter, prospective, real-world cohort study of effects of tenofovir disoproxyl fumarate (TDF) monotherapy and TDF-based combination therapy, as rescue therapy, in patients with multidrug-resistant chronic HBV infections.

METHODS

We recruited patients with chronic HBV infection with resistance to antivirals from 8 tertiary hospitals in Korea. Patients (n=423) received rescue therapy with TDF monotherapy (n=174) or TDF-based combination therapy (n=249). The median follow-up period was 180 weeks. A virologic response was defined as a serum HBV DNA level of <20 IU/mL.

RESULTS

Cumulative rates of virologic response did not differ significantly between the groups that received TDF monotherapy vs combination therapy at 48 weeks (71.7% vs 68.9%), 96 weeks (85.1% vs 84.2%), 144 weeks (92.1% vs 92.7%), 192 weeks (93.4% vs 95.7%), or 240 weeks (97.7% vs 97.2%). Serum levels of HBV DNA below 4.0 log₁₀ IU/mL (odds ratio, 2.478; 95% CI 1.959-3.135; P < .001) and the absence of mutations associated with resistance to adefovir (odds ratio, 1.570; 95% CI 1.279-1.926; P < .001) were associated with virologic response in patients with MDR. There was no significant difference of virologic response among patients of different ages, sex, patients with vs without cirrhosis, positivity for hepatitis B e antigen, or renal function (all P > .05).

CONCLUSION

In a multicenter, real-world cohort study, long-term use of TDF monotherapy showed non-inferior antiviral efficacy compared with that of TDF-based combination therapy in patients with MDR.

Efficacy of long-term treatment with tenofovir in Chinese nucleos(t)ide-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients regardless of baseline viral load

The aim of the present study was to analyze the efficacy and safety of tenofovir (TDF) treatment for up to 5 years in nucleos(t)ide-naïve chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients, particularly those with a high viral load, a in real-life scenario. A total of 144 nucleos(t)ide-naïve CHB patients who received TDF monotherapy for at least 3 months were retrospectively analyzed. The primary endpoint measure was the achievement of virological response (VR; undetectable serum HBV DNA, <100 IU/ml). The secondary endpoints were alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization (ALT < upper limit of normal), hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) seroconversion and safety. The median follow-up period was 120 weeks (range, 12-264 weeks). In total, 144, 130, 114, 78, 67, 40 and 13 patients were followed up for at least 12, 24, 48, 96, 144, 192 and 240 weeks, respectively. An incremental trend was observed in the rate of VR: 73.1, 91.3, 98.1, 100, 100 and 100% of the patients exhibited VR at 24, 48, 96, 144, 192 and 240 weeks, respectively. Furthermore, 29 patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA ≥8 log₁₀ IU/ml at baseline achieved VR during the follow-up period. The proportions of patients achieving normal ALT levels were 72.1, 78.6, 91.2, 95, 96 and 100%, at 24, 48, 96, 144, 192 and 240 weeks, respectively. The rate of HBeAg loss reached 35.6% at week 240. Among the 130 patients, HBV DNA was detectable [partial VR (PVR)] in 35 patients at 24 weeks of follow-up, and 30 of those 35 patients (85.7%) required >24 weeks of further TDF therapy to achieve VR. No serious adverse events were reported. In conclusion, long-term TDF treatment of nucleos(t)ide-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients, regardless of high viral load at baseline, was effective and safe in a real-life scenario. Adjustment of TDF monotherapy may be unnecessary in nucleos(t)ide-naïve patients with PVR at 24 weeks.

Okuda lecture: Challenges of hepatitis B in the era of antiviral therapy

Nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) are effective, safe, and convenient antiviral therapy to suppress replication of hepatitis B virus, which can be translated into improved long-term outcome of chronic hepatitis B patients. The current recommended first-line NAs, namely, entecavir and tenofovir, are largely free from problems of drug resistance. Nonetheless, there are still a few challenges in the era of NA. First, the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma can only be reduced but not eliminated, particularly among cirrhotic patients. For cirrhotic patients who have persistent low-level viremia on NA, that is, partial responders, the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma is higher than those with complete viral suppression. The best strategy to manage partial responders to entecavir or tenofovir is uncertain. Second, immune-tolerant patients are very difficult to treat with NA. A significant proportion of immune-tolerant patients will have detectable viremia despite a few years of continuous NA treatment, and the rate of hepatitis B e-antigen seroconversion is very low. Third, most patients need long-term treatment as NA cannot eliminate covalently closed circular DNA in the hepatocytes. Some patients can consider stop NA according to treatment guidelines, but viral and clinical relapses often occur after treatment cessation. There is no concrete consensus on when one should stop NA in a hepatitis B e-antigen-negative patient among different treatment guidelines. New biomarkers such as hepatitis B surface antigen level can be used to select patients to stop NA, but the data are still preliminary.

Recent advances in assessment and treatment of chronic hepatitis B

This paper reviews the recent advances in the assessment and treatment of chronic hepatitis B with regard to predicting inflammation and fibrosis with non-invasive biomarkers and transient elastography, clinical benefits of long-term nucleos(t)ide analog (NA) antiviral therapy, serological benefits (HBeAg and HBsAg loss) of concurrent or sequential NAs and pegylated interferon, as well as risk factors for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Unmet need in chronic hepatitis B management

Despite all these exciting developments, there remain some unmet needs in the management for patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). As majority of CHB patients are going to use oral nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) for decades, Safety profile of NAs is of no doubt an important issue. The newest nucleotide analogue tenofovir alafenamide is potent in terms of viral suppression, together with favourable renal and bone safety profile. Biochemical response as reflected by alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization is recently found to be prognostically important. Patients who achieved ALT normalization have reduced the risk of hepatic events by 49%. Functional cure as reflected by hepatitis B surface antigen seroclearance not only implies patients may stop NA treatment, it also confers to a reduced risk of hepatocellular carcinoma and other hepatic events. Hence functional cure should be the ultimate treatment goal in CHB patients. Preemptive antiviral treatment may reduce mother-to-child transmission of hepatitis B virus, especially if birth dose of vaccination cannot be given in the first two hours after delivery. Lastly, despite the currently first-line NAs have high-genetic barrier to drug resistance mutations, there are still are many patients who were previously treated with low barrier of resistance including lamivudine, telbivudine or adefovir dipivoxil which could lead to antiviral resistance and affecting the choice of NAs.

Is Combination Antiviral Therapy Mandatory for Maintenance Therapy in Fully Suppressed Multidrug-Resistant Hepatitis B Patients?

Aim

The efficacy of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy as maintenance therapy in multidrug-resistant (MDR) hepatitis B virus (HBV) patients after complete virologic suppression (CVS) has not been well evaluated. We evaluated the efficacy of maintenance TDF monotherapy compared with conventional TDF plus entecavir combination therapy after CVS of MDR HBV.

Methods

In this single-center retrospective study, patients with MDR HBV who were previously treated with entecavir plus TDF combination therapy and achieved CVS were included. Patients were either maintained on entecavir plus TDF combination therapy or switched to TDF monotherapy after CVS. The primary endpoint was the virologic breakthrough, and secondary outcomes were liver cirrhosis (LC) or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development. To overcome immortal time bias, time-varying Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed.

Results

A total of 201 patients were included, and 153 patients were maintained on entecavir plus TDF combination therapy (combination group); 48 patients were converted from combination therapy to TDF monotherapy (single group) after CVS. Five patients experienced a virologic breakthrough, one patient in the single group owing to poor transient compliance and four patients in the combination group (P = 0.51). One new case of LC developed in the single group; five cases of LC developed in the combination group (P = 0.35). No new HCC development occurred in the single group, while seven cases of HCC developments were noted in the combination group. However, these results were not statistically significant (P = 0.54).

Conclusions

For patients with suppressed HBV DNA, the efficacy of TDF monotherapy as maintenance therapy is comparable to that of entecavir plus TDF combination therapy.

Management of Hepatitis B Virus Infection: 2018 Guidelines from the Canadian Association for the Study of Liver Disease and Association of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Disease Canada

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is an important public health problem in Canada. In keeping with evolving evidence and understanding of HBV pathogenesis, the Canadian Association for the Study of Liver Disease periodically publishes HBV management guidelines. The goals of the 2018 guidelines are to (1) highlight the public health impact of HBV infection in Canada and the need to improve diagnosis and linkage to care, (2) recommend current best-practice guidelines for treatment of HBV, (3) summarize the key HBV laboratory diagnostic tests, and (4) review evidence on HBV management in special patient populations and include more detail on management of HBV in pediatric populations. An overview of novel HBV tests and therapies for HBV in development is provided to highlight the recent advances in HBV clinical research. The aim and scope of these guidelines are to serve as an up-to-date, comprehensive resource for Canadian health care providers in the management of HBV infection.

Step-down strategy in antiviral resistant chronic hepatitis B patients who achieved viral suppression with rescue combination therapy

In the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with drug resistance, rescue combination therapy leads to viral suppression in almost all patients. However, once it is achieved, lifelong maintenance especially, by using combination therapy is not always possible in a significant proportion of patients. At present, there is no consensus on whether it is possible to switch to monotherapy from combination therapy. However, there is robust evidence to support step-down therapy, which involves switching from combination therapy to monotherapy in antiviral resistant CHB patients who achieve complete viral response from combination therapy. We review the evidence in favor of switching to monotherapy in antiviral resistant CHB patients who achieve complete viral response by combination therapy.

Long-term safety and efficacy of nucleo(t)side analogue therapy in hepatitis B

Long-term treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) with nucleos(t)ide analogues is often necessary to achieve durable viral suppression. Therefore, current guidelines recommend the most potent drugs with optimal resistance profiles. Entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) are the first-line monotherapies for CHB. All of these drugs are highly effective in suppressing viral replication but with slightly different safety profiles. This review provides an overview of the long-term efficacy and safety data that have become available over the 10 years since ETV and TDF were first approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis, and recent data on TAF in patients with CHB.

HIV-hepatitis B virus coinfection: epidemiology, pathogenesis, and treatment

: HIV infection has a significant impact on the natural history of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, with increased levels of HBV DNA, accelerated progression of liver disease and increased liver-associated mortality compared with HBV monoinfection. Widespread uptake and early initiation of HBV-active antiretroviral therapy has substantially improved the natural history of HIV-HBV coinfection but the prevalence of liver disease remains elevated in this population. In this paper, we review recent studies examining the natural history and pathogenesis of liver disease and seroconversion in HIV-HBV coinfection in the era of HBV-active antiretroviral therapy and the effects of HIV directly on liver disease. We also review novel therapeutics for the management of HBV with a particular emphasis on clinical strategies being developed for an HBV cure and an HIV cure and their impact on HIV-HBV coinfected individuals.