Alleviated symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection in chronic hepatitis B patients with immune control.

The impact of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection on the progression of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease remains controversial. We aimed to investigate whether pre-existing chronic HBV (CHB) infection and therapy with anti-HBV nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) influence the clinical presentation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variant infection. In this study, clinical information was collected via a questionnaire from patients with COVID-19, and their clinical symptoms were quantitatively assessed for comparative analyses. Additionally, hepatitis B-related laboratory data were collected for CHB patients. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize confounding biases. A total of 785 patients with COVID-19 were included in the cohort, of which 387 were identified as being infected with CHB infection and they were categorized as being in the immune control or clearance phase. After PSM, the CHB group (n = 222) had a shorter duration of fever and disease course, milder clinical symptoms, and lower incidence of pneumonia than the non-CHB group (n = 222) after Omicron variant infection (p < 0.05). After the adjustment of confounding factors, CHB patients showed a lower risk of prolonged fever, severe clinical symptoms, and pneumonia (p < 0.05). However, there were no statistically significant differences in the clinical symptoms and incidence of pneumonia between CHB patients who received and did not receive NAs, or CHB patients who received tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and entecavir (p > 0.05). In conclusion, our findings suggest that the crosstalk of anti-HBV immunity may contribute to the alleviated symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants infection in the CHB patients, independent of anti-HBV NA therapy.

Comparative efficacy of 5 sodium-glucose cotransporter protein-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor and 4 glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist drugs in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A GRADE-assessed systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background: The relative efficacy of 5 sodium-glucose cotransporter protein-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors and 4 glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) therapy has not been sufficiently investigated. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which patients with NAFLD were treated with SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists were included. Primary outcomes were improvements in liver enzymes and liver fat parameters, while secondary outcomes included anthropometric measures, blood lipids and glycemic parameters. The frequentist method was used to perform a network meta-analysis. Evidence certainty was assessed using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE). Results: The criteria were satisfied by 37 RCTs with 9 interventions (5 SGLT-2 inhibitors and 4 GLP-1 receptor agonists). Based on high certainty evidence, in patients with NAFLD (or comorbid with type 2 diabetes), semaglutide could lower alanine aminotransferase as well as aspartate aminotransferase, γ-glutamyl transferase, controlled attenuation parameter, liver stiffness measurement, body weight, systolic blood pressure, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, glycosylated hemoglobin. Liraglutide could lower alanine aminotransferase as well as subcutaneous adipose tissue, body mass index, fasting blood glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin, glucose and homeostasis model assessment, while dapagliflozin could lower alanine aminotransferase as well as body weight, fasting blood glucose, postprandial blood glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin, glucose and homeostasis model assessment. Conclusion: Semaglutide, liraglutide, and dapagliflozin all have a certain effect on NAFLD (or comorbid with type 2 diabetes) based on high confidence evidence from indirect comparisons, and semaglutide appears to have a therapeutic advantage over the other included medicines. Head-to-head studies are needed to provide more confidence in clinical decision-making.