Comparable Incidence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients Treated with Entecavir or Tenofovir

Virologic Response at 12 Months Predicts Lower Hepatocellular Carcinoma Risk in Genotype D Chronic Hepatitis B Patients Treated with Nucleos(t)ide Analogues

Background/Objectives: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a virus that can cause chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in humans, leading to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In this study, we aimed to investigate the relationships between early ALT normalization (at 12 months), the virologic response in CHB patients, and the risk of HCC development. Methods: Data from a retrospective cohort study involving 616 chronic hepatitis B patients were used. The effects of ALT normalization and virologic response on the risk of developing HCC at 12 months of treatment were analyzed. Results: During a median treatment duration of 70.9 months, 36 (5.8%) HCC cases were detected in the total patient population. ALT normalization was detected in 68.83% of patients at 12 months of treatment. The rate of HCC in the group with early ALT normalization was lower than that in the group without ALT normalization, but this difference was not statistically significant (5% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.161). At the end of 12 months of treatment, virologic response was detected in 80.68% of the patients. The rate of patients developing HCC was significantly lower in the virologic response group (4.8% vs. 10.1%, p = 0.028). However, the risk of developing HCC was also significantly higher in the virologically unresponsive group, according to the virologic response at 12 months (p = 0.034). Conclusions: According to the results of this study, achieving virologic response at the end of 12 months in genotype D CHB patients treated with nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) reduces the risk of developing HCC.

Assessing pricing and affordability of HBV treatment in Asia-Pacific region: a barrier to elimination

BACKGROUND

The Asia-Pacific (AP) region carries a substantial burden of HBV. Affordable HBV treatment is crucial to attain WHO's elimination goal. This study assesses the pricing and affordability of HBV treatment in AP.

METHODS

A survey conducted among APASL members from 2 Aug to 30 Oct, 2023, gathered data on antiviral HBV drugs, treatment costs covering stages of chronic hepatitis B (CHB), compensated cirrhosis (CC), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), liver transplant, and monitoring expenses. Drug costs for TDF and ETV were compared to international reference price (TDF: $30, ETV: $36 per person per year), generating a median price ratio (MPR) where MPR < 1 indicated an acceptable local price. Affordability was evaluated by comparing yearly CHB treatment cost to yearly minimum wage in each country/area, all converted to 2023 US$.

RESULTS

ETV costs ranged from $42 per person per year in Pakistan to $2640 in Malaysia, while TDF costs varied from $12 in mainland China to $2446 in Hong Kong. Almost all MPR exceeded 1. Affordability of HBV treatment varied, with CHB patients in Australia paying 1.4% of minimum yearly wage to get 1 year CHB treatment, in contrast to Myanmar's 78.6%. Affordability disparities were also evident for patients with CC, HCC, and liver-transplant needs, though monitoring costs were generally affordable.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite patent expiration and availability of low-cost generics for TDF and ETV, HBV medication costs in Asia-Pacific region remain high. CHB treatment is generally unaffordable for patients, posing a significant barrier to HBV elimination in this endemic region.

Targeting hepatitis B virus-associated nephropathy: efficacy and challenges of current antiviral treatments

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection remains a major global health challenge, affecting approximately 296 million people and causing significant mortality annually. Despite vaccination efforts, HBV prevalence persists, particularly in low- and middle-income regions and endemic areas like China. HBV is closely associated with various kidney diseases, including acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, and glomerulonephritis, through mechanisms such as immune complex deposition, direct viral invasion, and chronic inflammation. Patients undergoing hemodialysis or kidney transplantation are at increased risk of HBV infection and reactivation, highlighting the need for effective preventive and therapeutic measures. This review examines the classification and clinical features of HBV-associated nephropathy, focusing on membranous nephropathy and membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis. It explores the pathogenesis, emphasizing immune complex deposition and podocyte apoptosis. Antiviral therapy, particularly with nucleos(t)ide analogs like entecavir and tenofovir (including TAF and TMF), demonstrates superior efficacy and safety compared to older agents such as lamivudine and adefovir. While interferon therapy offers benefits, its use is limited by adverse effects. Additionally, individualized treatment strategies for specific populations, including pregnant women and HIV co-infected patients, are crucial. Addressing HBV-associated nephropathy requires enhanced surveillance, timely antiviral intervention, and tailored therapeutic approaches to improve patient outcomes.

Comparison of tenofovir versus entecavir for preventing hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B patients: an umbrella review and meta-analysis

There are several meta-analyses about the comparison of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) versus entecavir (ETV) for preventing hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic HBV infection published in recent years. However, the conclusions vary considerably. This umbrella review aims to consolidate evidence from various systematic reviews to evaluate differences in hepatocellular carcinoma prevention between two drugs. Systematic searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify original meta-analyses. Finally, twelve studies were included for quantitative analyses. We found that TDF treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC than ETV (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI 0.75-0.86, p < 0.05). The lower risk of HCC in patients given TDF compared with ETV persisted in subgroup analyses performed with propensity score-matched cohorts, cirrhosis cohorts, nucleos(t)ide naïve cohorts and Asian cohorts. In the cohorts of non-Asia and patients without cirrhosis, there was no difference exhibited between these two drugs. Subsequent analyses showed TDF treatment was also associated with a lower incidence of death or transplantation than patients receiving ETV. Overall, the preventive effect of these two drugs on HCC has been studied in several published meta-analyses, but few were graded as high-quality evidence, meanwhile, most of which had high overlap. Thus, future researchers should include updated cohorts or conduct prospective RCTs to further explore this issue.

Baseline Viral Load and On-Treatment Hepatocellular Carcinoma Risk in Chronic Hepatitis B: A Multinational Cohort Study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk persists in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) despite antiviral therapy. The relationship between pre-treatment baseline hepatitis B virus (HBV) viral load and HCC risk during antiviral treatment remains uncertain.

METHODS

This multinational cohort study aimed to investigate the association between baseline HBV viral load and on-treatment HCC risk in 20,826 noncirrhotic, hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and HBeAg-negative patients with baseline HBV DNA levels ≥2000 IU/mL (3.30 log10 IU/mL) who initiated entecavir or tenofovir treatment. The primary outcome was on-treatment HCC incidence, stratified by baseline HBV viral load as a categorical variable.

RESULTS

In total, 663 patients developed HCC over a median follow-up of 4.1 years, with an incidence rate of 0.81 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.87). Baseline HBV viral load was significantly associated with HCC risk in a non-linear parabolic pattern, independent of other factors. Patients with baseline viral load between 6.00 and 7.00 log10 IU/mL had the highest on-treatment HCC risk (adjusted hazard ratio, 4.28; 95% CI, 2.15-8.52; P < .0001) compared with those with baseline viral load ≥8.00 log10 IU/mL, who exhibited the lowest HCC risk.

CONCLUSION

Baseline viral load showed a significant, non-linear, parabolic association with HCC risk during antiviral treatment in noncirrhotic patients with CHB. Early initiation of antiviral treatment based on HBV viral load may help prevent irreversible HCC risk accumulation in patients with CHB.

Efficacy comparison of high-genetic barrier nucleos(t)ide analogues in treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Four high-genetic barrier nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) for chronic hepatitis B (CHB), namely entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), and besifovir dipivoxil maleate (BSV), have been established. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy of four high-genetic barrier NAs using a network meta-analysis of randomized trials and propensity score-matched cohorts.

METHODS

Systematic search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane library, and EMBASE and included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that used propensity score matching. Studies on treatment-naïve CHB patients treated with ETV, TDF, TAF, or BSV were included. Outcomes included alanine aminotransferase normalization and hepatitis B e antigen seroclearance at week 48 and undetectable hepatitis B virus DNA at weeks 48 and 96. Network meta-analysis was performed to synthesize the results.

RESULTS

In total, 15,000 patients from 16 studies were included. In terms of 48- and 96-week virologic response (VR), TDF outperformed ETV with statistical significance (48 weeks: odds ratio [OR], 1.38; p < 0.001; 96 weeks: OR, 1.57; p = 0.004). ETV was ranked first for 48-week biochemical response (BR) and outperformed TDF (OR, 0.76; p = 0.028). In the sensitivity analyses, 48-week VR from randomized-controlled trials were compiled, and the same trend toward the superiority of TDF over ETV was found (OR, 1.51; p = 0.030).

CONCLUSION

Four high-genetic barrier NAs were compared, and TDF was more likely to achieve a VR after 48 weeks, while ETV provided a superior BR after 48 weeks.

Cost-effectiveness of switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide versus entecavir for chronic hepatitis B patients in Greece

Aim: This study assessed the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) to either tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) or entecavir (ETV) in a Greek chronic hepatitis B (CHB) population. Patients & methods: A Markov model from the perspective of a third-party payer in Greece quantified the health and economic benefits of switching from TDF to either TAF or ETV over a lifetime horizon. Results: Over a lifetime, patients who switch from TDF to TAF versus patients who switch from TDF to ETV had an overall lower incidence of compensated cirrhosis (0.4% lower), decompensated cirrhosis (0.04% lower) and hepatocellular carcinoma (0.25% lower). Chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease were also lower in patients who switch to TAF; major osteoporotic fractures were similar for both groups. While total costs were higher for switching from TDF to TAF versus TDF to ETV due to the higher cost of TAF, switching from TDF to TAF versus ETV was cost effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €17,113 per quality-adjusted life year. Conclusion: Switching from TDF to TAF in patients living with CHB is a cost effective strategy to reduce adverse liver disease outcomes, while improving bone- and renal-related safety outcomes.

Lower risk of hepatocellular carcinoma with tenofovir than entecavir in antiviral treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis involving 90,897 participants

Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) are equally recommended as first-line treatments for antiviral treatment-naïve (ART-naïve) chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients by practice guidelines because of their similarly high antiviral efficacy and low resistance rate. However, whether one is superior to the other in terms of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prevention is currently largely controversial. We aimed to identify and synthesize these existing studies regarding the HCC risk of these two highly potent antivirals in treatment-naïve CHB patients. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies between January 1, 2012 and June 25, 2022. These studies used ETV monotherapy and/or TDF monotherapy to treat ART-naïve CHB patients and reported the incidence of HCC. The extracted data were analyzed using a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models. The HCC incidence difference was expressed as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). A total of 17 studies with 90,897 ART-naïve CHB patients (ETV = 60,980 vs TDF = 29,917) were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with ETV, TDF was associated with a significant lower cumulative incidence of HCC (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.56-0.76). No significant heterogeneity or publication bias was found among the included studies (I2 = 48.1%, Begg's p = 0.363 and Egger's p = 0.748). TDF is associated with a lower risk of HCC compared with entecavir in ART-naïve CHB patients. The results suggest that TDF may be a better option for ART-naïve CHB patients with high HCC risks.

Inverse Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis of Entecavir and Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B: A Large-Scale Multicenter Study

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is reportedly superior or at least comparable to entecavir (ETV) in preventing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) among chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients; however, it remains controversial. This study aimed to conduct comprehensive comparisons between the two antivirals. CHB patients initially treated with ETV or TDF between 2012 and 2015 at 20 referral centers in Korea were included. The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of HCC. The secondary outcomes included death or liver transplantation, liver-related outcome, extrahepatic malignancy, development of cirrhosis, decompensation events, complete virologic response (CVR), seroconversion rate, and safety. Baseline characteristics were balanced using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Overall, 4210 patients were enrolled: 1019 received ETV and 3191 received TDF. During the median follow-ups of 5.6 and 5.5 years, 86 and 232 cases of HCC were confirmed in the ETV and TDF groups, respectively. There was no difference in HCC incidence between the groups both before (p = 0.36) and after IPTW was applied (p = 0.81). Although the incidence of extrahepatic malignancy was significantly higher in the ETV group than in the TDF group before weighting (p = 0.02), no difference was confirmed after IPTW (p = 0.29). The cumulative incidence rates of death or liver transplantation, liver-related outcome, new cirrhosis development, and decompensation events were also comparable in the crude population (p = 0.24-0.91) and in the IPTW-adjusted population (p = 0.39-0.80). Both groups exhibited similar rates of CVR (ETV vs. TDF: 95.1% vs. 95.8%, p = 0.38), and negative conversion of hepatitis B e antigen (41.6% vs. 37.2%, p = 0.09) or surface antigen (2.8% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.10). Compared to the ETV group, more patients in the TDF group changed initial antivirals due to side effects, including decreased kidney function (n = 17), hypophosphatemia (n = 20), and osteoporosis (n = 18). In this large-scale multicenter study, ETV and TDF demonstrated comparable effectiveness across a broad range of outcomes in patients with treatment-naïve CHB during similar follow-up periods.

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.

Meta-analysis of the occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after the treatment of entecavir and tenofovir for chronic hepatitis B

BACKGROUND

Tenofovir and Entecavir are recommended as the first-line medicine of treatment for chronic hepatitis B. The occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after the treatment of chronic hepatitis B is a major problem. For the time being it is still unclear whether there remains a difference in risk correlation of hepatocellular carcinoma after the treatment of Tenofovir and Entecavir for chronic hepatitis B. Since previous studies have raised different ideas, this article aims to come to a conclusion targeting such a topic through analyzing the latest data.

METHODS

We searched some databases, such as PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, for related studies on patients with chronic hepatitis B receiving the treatment of Tenofovir and Entecavir and then developing hepatocellular carcinoma. The search time was set to begin from the establishment time of the above-mentioned databases to May 2022. Two researchers were designated to screen the literature independently according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria set in this study; they then evaluated the quality of the literature included and extracted the data. Revman 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

After screening the literature, a total of 20 pieces of cohort study literature conformed to the inclusion criteria. Among which were 62,860 cases of patients receiving Entecavir, and 27,544 cases of patients receiving Tenofovir; there were 3669 cases with the occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma in the Entecavir group and 1089 cases with the occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma in Tenofovir group. The result of Meta analysis of these 20 pieces of literature shows that compared with the Tenofovir group, the Entecavir group has a lower occurrence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma, and the difference is statistically significant. The results are expressed as odd ratio (OR) and 95% confident interval (95%CI), (OR = 1.66, 95%CI: 1.35-2.05, P < .05). The result of Meta analysis of 10 studies related to Korea shows that the occurrence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma in the Tenofovir group is lower than that of the Entecavir group, and the difference is statistically significant (OR = 1.59, 95%CI: 1.29-1.95, P < .05). The result of meta-analysis of 5 studies related to China shows that the occurrence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma of Tenofovir group is lower than that of Entecavir group, and the difference is statistically significant (OR = 2.35, 95%CI: 1.15-4.81, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

The occurrence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma after the treatment of tenofovir for chronic hepatitis B is lower than that of the treatment of entecavir.

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.

Predicting the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B patients receiving antiviral therapy: Validating the CAMD and AASL scores in China

BACKGROUND

We aimed to validate the predictive value of the cirrhosis, age, male sex, and diabetes (CAMD) score and age, albumin, sex, and liver cirrhosis (AASL) score for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients, treated with nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs) in Northeast China.

METHODS

From January 2009 to June 2020, 945 patients diagnosed with CHB who received NUC therapy at China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University were included. Comprehensive medical records were retrospectively analyzed, and the predictive values of the CAMD score and AASL score for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients (5.94%) were diagnosed with HCC. Multivariate analysis revealed that age [odds ratio (OR) = 1.041, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.009-1.073, P < 0.011] and cirrhosis (OR = 3.297, 95% CI 1.383-7.861, P < 0.007) were independent predictors of HCC. Either the CAMD or AASL score was significantly higher in the HCC group compared to the non-HCC group. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of CAMD and AASL was 0.721 (95% CI 0.663-0.780) and 0.718 (95% CI 0.662-0.774), respectively. Risk stratification using either CAMD or AASL revealed significant differences in the one-, three-, and five-year cumulative incidence rates of HCC between the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups (all P < 0.001, log-rank test).

CONCLUSIONS

Both CAMD and AASL scores have predictive value for HCC risk of CHB patients in Northeast China. In future, the optimal monitoring frequency and methods should be personalized.

Tenofovir alafenamide treatment may not worsen the lipid profile of chronic hepatitis B patients: a propensity score-matched analysis

Background/Aims

Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) has shown less favorable effect on lipids compared to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in clinical trials. However, data regarding these outcomes in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) are scarce. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effect of TAF on the lipid in patients with CHB.

Methods

A total of 237 TAF-treated CHB patients compared with TDF, inactive CHB, and non-hepatitis B virus (HBV)-infected control groups using propensity score matching (PSM).

Results

Following PSM, each analysis was conducted on cohorts via the matching of 70:140 (TAF:TDF), 89:89 (TAF:inactive CHB), 140:560 (TAF:non-HBV infected control), and 368:1,472 (TDF:non-HBV-infected control). A significant decrease in the total cholesterol (TC) level was noted at 48 weeks in the TDF group compared to the TAF group (176.3±32.9 vs. 156.7±27.7, P<0.001) and the non-HBV-infected control group (175.0±29.5 vs. 156.2±28.3, P<0.001). However, no significant change in TC was observed in the TAF group and inactive CHB or non-HBV-infected control groups at 48 weeks. For the subgroup analyses of TAF vs. non-HBV-infected control subjects and inactive CHB patients whose detailed lipid profile information were available, no between-group differences in TC, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, highdensity lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, TC/HDL ratio, and LDL/HDL ratio were observed at 48 weeks.

Conclusions

TDF seems to have a lipid-lowering effect compared to the non-HBV-infected control and TAF-treated groups. However, in real practice, TAF might not worsen the lipid profiles of subjects compared to non-HBV-infected controls and patients with inactive CHB.

Entecavir versus tenofovir in patients with chronic hepatitis B: Enemies or partners in the prevention of hepatocellular carcinoma

Over the past several decades, entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) have remained the first-line antiviral agents in several international guidelines. These two antiviral agents have shown similar short to intermediateterm efficacy, including virologic, biochemical, serologic, and histologic responses. However, huge controversies regarding the antiviral efficacy of ETV and TDF in preventing the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) still exist. In this review, we summarized recent studies that compared the treatment efficacy of ETV and TDF in terms of HCC development.

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.