Entecavir for the long-term treatment of chronic hepatitis B

Validation of risk prediction scores for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with entecavir or tenofovir

Several prediction scores for the early detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are available. We validated the predictive accuracy of age, albumin, sex, liver cirrhosis (AASL), RESCUE-B, PAGE-B and modified PAGE-B (mPAGE-B) scores in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients treated with entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). Between 2007 and 2014, 3171 patients were recruited (1645, ETV; 1517, TDF). The predictive accuracy of each prediction score was assessed. The mean age of the study population (1977 men; 1194 women) was 48.8 years. Liver cirrhosis was present in 1040 (32.8%) patients. During follow-up (median, 58.2 months), 280 (8.8%) patients developed HCC; these patients were significantly older; more likely to be male; had significantly higher proportions of liver cirrhosis, hypertension and diabetes; and had significantly higher values for the four risk scores than those who did not develop HCC (all P < .05). Older age (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.048), male sex (HR = 2.142), liver cirrhosis (HR = 3.144) and prolonged prothrombin time (HR = 2.589) were independently associated with an increased risk of HCC (all P < .05), whereas a higher platelet count (HR = 0.996) was independently associated with a decreased risk of HCC (P < .05). The predictive accuracy of AASL score was the highest for 3- and 5-year HCC predictions (areas under the curve [AUCs] = 0.818 and 0.816, respectively), followed by RESCUE-B, PAGE-B and mPAGE-B scores (AUC = 0.780-0.815 and 0.769-0.814, respectively). In conclusion, four HCC prediction scores were assessed in Korean CHB patients treated with ETV or TDF. The AASL score showed the highest predictive accuracy.

Concomitant food intake does not affect the efficacy of entecavir in chronic hepatitis B patients with virological response: a randomized, multicenter, noninferiority trial

Background

Little clinical data are available about the effect of food on the antiviral efficacy of entecavir for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. The present study evaluated whether entecavir administration in the fed state had comparable efficacy to the fasted condition for maintenance of viral suppression in HBV-infected patients with virological response on entecavir therapy.

Methods

In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, noninferiority study, patients who were currently receiving entecavir and showed a serum HBV DNA level of <20 IU/mL were randomized to take entecavir either under the fasted or fed condition for 48 weeks.

Results

We randomly assigned 50 patients to the fasted group and 46 patients to the fed group. The full analysis set consisted of 49 patients in the fasted group and 44 patients in the fed group. At week 48, the proportion of patients with HBV DNA <20 IU/mL was not significantly different between the fasted and fed groups (98% vs 100%, P=1.00). The mean log₁₀ HBV DNA changes from baseline were similar between the two groups (−0.004 vs −0.012 log₁₀ IU/mL, P=0.43). There were no significant differences in the proportions of patients with normal alanine aminotransferase (87.8% vs 95.5%, P=0.27) and hepatitis B e-antigen seroconversion (0% vs 6.7%, P=0.47) between the two groups. None of the patients showed viral breakthrough. In pharmacokinetic analysis, the maximum concentration and the area under the concentration– time curve to the last quantifiable concentration decreased by 26.4% and 9.3%, respectively, in the fed group compared with the fasted group. However, the differences between two groups were not statistically significant (P=0.28 and 0.83, respectively).

Conclusion

In patients with virological response under entecavir therapy, concomitant food intake did not affect the antiviral efficacy. For patients with adherence problem, taking entecavir with food may be considered to improve compliance.

Efficacy and Safety of Telbivudine Compared to Entecavir Among HBeAg+ Chronic Hepatitis B Patients: a Meta-Analysis Study

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a serious global health problem that is associated with huge social and economic costs. Early antiviral drugs, such as interferon-α2b, peginterferon-α2a, lamivudine, and adefovir, all have their limitations (such as low responses or safety concerns) in clinical application. Telbivudine and entecavir are two of the latest nucleotide drugs and both have been shown to have potent viral suppression. However, in patients with hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive chronic hepatitis B (CHB), inconsistent results have been generated for efficacy between telbivudine and entecavir. Therefore, evidence-based medical data are required to compare the efficacies, in terms of virological and biochemical responses, and safety between telbivudine and entecavir.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to compare the early antiviral efficacy and safety of telbivudine and entecavir in the treatment of patients with hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive chronic hepatitis B (CHB).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A search for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on HBeAg-positive CHB patients treated with telbivudine and entecavir for 24 or 52 weeks, published before December 2011, was performed. Primary efficacy endpoint was the cumulative rate of undetectable HBV DNA, and secondary efficacy endpoints included rates of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization, HBeAg disappearance, HBeAg seroconversion and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed using the Review Manager v5.1.4 software package. We assessed the pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the fixed-or random-effects model.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 555 patients were included. Telbivudine was associated with significantly higher rates of HBeAg disappearance (RR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.11 - 1.91) and HBeAg seroconversion (RR = 1.76, 95%CI: 1.25-2.48) than entecavir, but had higher adverse events (RR = 2.11, 95%CI: 1.23 - 3.60), compared with entecavir. There was no difference between telbivudine and entecavir in the rate of cumulative undetectable HBV DNA (RR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.90 - 1.10) and ALT normalization (RR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.85 - 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Telbivudine is associated with significantly higher rates of HBeAg disappearance and HBeAg seroconversion than entecavir, whereas entecavir is superior to telbivudine in safety. Both drugs have similar efficacy on rates of cumulative undetectable HBV DNA and ALT normalization.

Update on entecavir in the management of severe forms of Hepatitis B

Despite the effective management of most cases of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, there is still much room for improvement in the treatment of more severe cases of hepatitis B, such as those occurring in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, in transplanted subjects, and in patients with exacerbations of HBV infection. Among the treatments currently approved for the therapy of hepatitis B, entecavir determines a rapid suppression of viral load. This drug is also associated with a high genetic barrier and an overall favorable safety profile. This review provides an overview of recent evidence related to the use of entecavir in the management of the most severe forms of hepatitis B. The results obtained for this drug in real-life clinical practice are also reviewed.

Unsuccessful therapy with adefovir and entecavir-tenofovir in a patient with chronic hepatitis B infection with previous resistance to lamivudine: a fourteen-year evolution of hepatitis B virus mutations

BACKGROUND

Complex mutants can be selected under sequential selective pressure by HBV therapy. To determine hepatitis B virus genomic evolution during antiviral therapy we characterized the HBV quasi-species in a patient who did no respond to therapy following lamivudine breakthrough for a period of 14 years.

CASE PRESENTATION

The polymerase and precore/core genes were amplified and sequenced at determined intervals in a period of 14 years. HBV viral load and HBeAg/Anti-HBe serological profiles as well as amino transferase levels were also measured. A mixture of lamivudine-resistant genotype A2 HBV strains harboring the rtM204V mutation coexisted in the patient following viral breakthrough to lamivudine. The L180M+M204V dominant mutant displayed strong lamivudine-resistance. As therapy was changed to adefovir, then to entecavir, and finally to entecavir-tenofovir the viral load showed fluctuations but lamivudine-resistant strains continued to be selected, with minor contributions to the HBV quasi-species composition of additional resistance-associated mutations. At the end of the 14-year follow up period, high viral loads were predominant, with viral strains harboring the lamivudine-resistance signature rtL180M+M204V. The precore/core frame A1762T and G1764A double mutation was detected before treatment and remaining in this condition during the entire follow-up. Specific entecavir and tenofovir primary resistance-associated mutations were not detected at any time. Plasma concentrations of tenofovir indicated adequate metabolism of the drug.

CONCLUSIONS

We report the selection of HBV mutants carrying well-defined primary resistance mutations that escaped lamivudine in a fourteen-year follow-up period. With the exception of tenofovir resistance mutations, subsequent unselected primary resistance mutations were detected as minor populations into the HBV quasispecies composition during adefovir or entecavir monotherapies. Although tenofovir is considered an appropriate therapeutic alternative for the treatment of entecavir-unresponsive patients, its use was not effective in the case reported here.

Past hepatitis B virus infection in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving biological and/or nonbiological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs

To evaluate the prevalence of past infection with hepatitis B virus (HBV) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and the incidence of its reactivation under treatment with biological and/or nonbiological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), 239 patients receiving DMARD therapy were consecutively enrolled and tested for HBV-DNA, using a real-time polymerase chain reaction assay, HBV serology including hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc), and serum levels of aminotransferase. Data prior to DMARD therapy and during follow-up were examined by reviewing medical records. Two patients (0.8%) were positive for HBsAg at the start of therapy. Sixty patients (25.1%) showed HBsAg-negative and anti-HBc-positive serology indicative of past HBV infection. Among these 60 patients, 2 patients (3.3%) experienced reactivation of viral replication (<2.1 log copies/ml) during DMARD therapy. One had been receiving tacrolimus, prednisolone, and methotrexate (MTX); the other had been treated with adalimumab, prednisolone, and MTX. Their serum aminotransferase levels remained normal, and HBsAg was negative. Ten weeks after reactivation of viral replication had been noted, the HBV-DNA titer in the former patient had increased to 2.9 log copies/ml, and HBsAg and hepatitis B e antigen had become weakly positive. In contrast, the latter patient had become negative for viral DNA without any antiviral prophylaxis. In conclusion, the use of biological and nonbiological DMARDs is relatively safe in most RA patients with past HBV infection, even when no anti-HBV prophylaxis is administered. Considering the high prevalence of past infection in RA patients and the high cost of prophylaxis against HBV reactivation, universal prophylaxis is impractical. Regular monitoring of serum viral DNA seems to be the most rational approach to preventing the development of clinically apparent hepatitis.