Switching from entecavir to tenofovir alafenamide for chronic hepatitis B patients with low-level viraemia.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: About 20% of patients receiving nucleos(t)ide analogues treatment experienced low-level viraemia (LLV), which is associated with progression of liver fibrosis and high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of switching from entecavir (ETV) to tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF) in ETV-treated patients with LLV. METHODS: In this prospective study, ETV-treated patients with LLV, presented to our hospital from December 2018 to October 2019, were enrolled. Switching to TAF or continuing ETV was given. The primary effectiveness endpoint was complete virological response (CVR) at 24 weeks, and the safety endpoint was the first occurrence of any clinical adverse event during the treatment. RESULTS: Totally, 211 patients were recruited and propensity score matching (PSM) generated 75 patients in either TAF or ETV group. After PSM, baseline characteristics were balanced in two groups. After 24-week treatment, the CVR and ALT normalization in TAF group were 62.7% and 47.6%, which were higher than 9.3% and 10.5% in ETV group (OR 16.4, 95% CI 6.6-40.0, P < .001) respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that switching to TAF achieved favours CVR regardless of the status of sex, age, CHB family history, HBV DNA, HBeAg and cirrhosis, whereas alcohol consumption and diabetes mellitus might compromise the CVR of switching to TAF. Both therapies were well tolerated and had satisfying renal safety. CONCLUSIONS: For ETV-treated patients with LLV, switching to TAF is safe enough and superior compared with continuing ETV monotherapy regarding both virological and biochemical benefits.

[Very low-level viremia: new clinical attention-requiring problem during the course of anti-hepatitis B virus treatment].

Clinical studies have validated low-level viremia is associated with a variety of adverse outcomes in patients with chronic hepatitis B during the course of receiving nucleos(t)ide analogue antiviral therapy. With the advancement of PCR technology, the high sensitivity PCR detection of HBV DNA can reach the lower limit of detection of < 5-10 IU/mL. The standard criterion for judging among patients who have achieved complete virological response is HBV DNA levels < 20 IU/ml. The use of highly sensitive PCR tests can detect very low-level viremia (HBV DNA < 20 IU/ml, but > 5-10 IU/mL) in some patients. However, there are currently fewer relevant studies, and more research data needs to be accumulated to answer this clinical question of whether long-term very low-level viremia affects the clinical outcome of patients with chronic hepatitis B.

Optimal drug administration manner would rescue partial virological response in chronic hepatitis B patients with entecavir or tenofovir treatment.

Not all treatment-naïve patients receiving entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) therapy can achieve complete virological response, and many factors may be related with the outcome of partial virological response. This study aimed to determine whether the manner of drug administration affects the antiviral efficacy of ETV/TDF monotherapy. All eligible patients were divided into complete or partial response cohorts based on their virological response following 24-week therapy. Factors related with partial response were evaluated. Patients with partial response were further grouped depending on whether they later adjusted the manner of drug administration, and the antiviral efficacy was compared between the two groups during prolonged treatment. A total of 518 patients were enrolled. Suboptimal drug administration (OR 77.511, P = .000), positive-HBeAg (OR 3.191, P = .000) and ETV treatment (OR 2.537, P = .001) were identified as independent risk factors for partial response. Among patients with partial response, 213 were in the adjusted group and 76 were in the unadjusted group. The percentages of patients with undetectable serum HBV DNA (78.9% vs 31.6%, P < .001) and with normal alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (88.7% vs 68.4%, P < .001) were both higher in the adjusted group than that in unadjusted group following a further 6-month therapy. In conclusion, the manner of drug administration is an important factor influencing the efficacy of ETV/TDF therapy, and optimal drug administration manner can help to increase antiviral efficacy and rescue patients with partial response.

[Study on early predictive factors of an incomplete viral response with 48 week-entecavir therapy in HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B patients].

Objective: To study the virological and serological indicators before treatment and 24 weeks after treatment to predict the partial virological response (PVR) of 48-week entecavir (ETV) treatment, and formulate early clinical adjustment treatment plans for HBeAg-positive CHB patients. Methods: HBeAg-positive CHB-naïve patients diagnosed in the Department of Infectious Diseases, Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University, who were treated with oral ETV monotherapy from January 2018 were enrolled. The groups were divided according to the test results of HBV DNA at 48 weeks. Among them, HBV DNA < 20 IU/ml was the complete viral response (CVR) group, and HBV DNA ≥ 20 IU/ml was the PVR group. The virological and serological indexes of the two groups before treatment and 24 weeks after treatment were compared. ROC curve univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were performed to find out the early predictors of PVR in HBeAg-positive CHB patients receiving ETV therapy for 48 weeks. Results: As of July 2020, a total of 90 cases had completed 48 weeks of treatment, including 50 cases of CVR (55.56%) and 40 cases of PVR (44.44%). Before treatment and at 24 weeks of treatment, HBsAg, HBeAg and HBV DNA in the PVR group were significantly higher than those in the CVR group (P < 0.001). Univariate analysis showed that HBV DNA quantification (AUC = 0.961, P < 0.001, PPV = 97.06%, NPV = 87.50%) and HBeAg quantification (AUC = 0.883, P < 0.001, PPV = 90.63%, NPV = 81.03%) had higher predictive value at 24 weeks of treatment. Multivariate analysis showed that HBeAg > 1.952 log(10) S/CO (OR = 3.177, 95% CI: 1.261 ~ 8.267, P = 0.018) and HBV DNA > 2.205 log(10) IU / ml (OR = 43.197, 95% CI: 6.858 ~ 272.069, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of PVR at 24 weeks of treatment, and their combination had the best predictive effect. Conclusion: In HBeAg-positive CHB patients receiving ETV treatment for 48 weeks, HBV DNA combined with HBeAg quantification can be an early predictor of PVR at 24 weeks. Additionally, patients with both HBV DNA and HBeAg > 2 log(10) at 24 weeks of treatment must wait 48 weeks to obtain CVR, so it is recommended that treatment strategies should be adjusted at this time.

Outcome of adefovir add-on lamivudine rescue therapy of up to 5 years in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We investigated the long-term efficacy of adefovir add-on lamivudine rescue therapy in lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B and the optimal cutoff hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA level that predicts complete virological response (CVR) among patients without CVR after 1 year of treatment. METHODS: We reviewed 167 lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B patients who received adefovir add-on rescue therapy for up to 5 years. Multivariate analysis, area under the receiver operating characteristic curves, and Youden index were used. RESULTS: Median age was 47.0 years; 112 patients were male. Median baseline HBV DNA level was 6.6 log10 IU/mL; hepatitis B e antigen was positive in 130 (77.4%) patients. Five-year CVR, alanine aminotransferase normalization, hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion, and adefovir resistance rates were 86.9%, 92.5%, 16.7%, and 6.0%, respectively. One-year HBV DNA level independently associated with CVR. Optimal cutoff HBV DNA level to predict CVR among patients who failed to achieve CVR at 1 year was 800 IU/mL (area under receiver operating characteristic curve 0.752; sensitivity 49.3%, specificity 93.5%). During the 5-year treatment, 92.1% of patients with favorable response (HBV DNA < 800 IU/mL at 1 year) achieved CVR; 45.6% achieved CVR among suboptimal responders (HBV DNA ≥ 800 IU/mL at 1 year) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Complete virological response or HBV DNA level < 800 IU/mL after 1 year adefovir add-on lamivudine rescue therapy can favorably predict CVR.

HBV-DNA level at 6 months of entecavir treatment predicts HBeAg loss in HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B patients.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: To evaluate whether on-treatment HBV-DNA level could predict the treatment response to entecavir in hepatitis B e antigen (HBe)-positive chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. METHODS: A total of 68 treatment-naïve HBeAg-positive patients (75% male, mean age at 46.6 ± 11.9 years) receiving at least 2 years of entecavir therapy were enrolled. The primary therapeutic endpoint was HBeAg loss. On-treatment complete virological response was defined as serum HBV-DNA < 63 IU/mL. RESULTS: The median baseline alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and HBV-DNA levels were 199.5 (27-1622) U/L and 7.7 (3.8-13.2) log10 IU/mL, respectively. The median treatment duration was 31.7 (24.3-69.6) months. The rate of HBeAg loss at 2 years was 30.9%. By univariate analysis, on-treatment complete virological response at Month 6 was associated with HBeAg loss at 2 years (p = 0.019). After adjustment for age, sex, cirrhosis, baseline ALT, and HBV-DNA levels, this factor remained significant in multivariate analysis (odds ratio: 4.35; 95% confidence interval: 1.24-15.24, p = 0.021). CONCLUSION: On-treatment complete virological response at Month 6 is a favorable factor predictive of HBeAg loss at 2 years of entecavir therapy. Therefore, measurement of serum HBV-DNA level at 6 months of entecavir therapy is optimal to predict HBeAg loss at 2 years of therapy in HBeAg-positive CHB patients.

Risk factors related to low-level viraemia in chronic hepatitis B patients receiving entecavir treatment.

Background: About 20% of on-treatment patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) experienced low-level viraemia (LLV), which is associated with persistent low-grade inflammation, fibrosis progression, and increased risk of hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to investigate the high-risk factors related to LLV. Methods: In this retrospective study, patients receiving entecavir (ETV) treatment from January 2018 to January 2023 were enrolled, and were divided into a LLV (HBV DNA 20-2000 IU/mL) cohort and a complete virological response (CVR) (HBV DNA < 20 IU/mL) cohort according to the virological response at week 48 posttreatment. Treatment baseline characteristics were retrieved from electronic medical records. Multivariate logistic regression was performed. Results: Totally, 1653 patients were enrolled, male patients accounted for 73.0%; the median age was 44 years; the mean HBV DNA level was 5.9 Log10 IU/ml. Among them, 472 (28.6%) experienced LLV. Multivariate analysis showed that HBeAg positivity (OR = 2.650, 95% CI: 2.000-3.511, p < 0.001), HBV DNA ≥ 6.0 Log10 IU/mL (OR = 1.370, 95% CI: 1.054-1.780, p = 0.019), qHBsAg ≥ 9000 IU/mL (OR = 4.472, 95% CI: 3.410-5.866, p < 0.001), cirrhosis (OR = 1.650, 95% CI: 1.234-2.207, P = 0.001), LSM ≥ 13.0 kPa (OR = 1.644, 95% CI: 1.203-2.246, p = 0.002), and PLT < 100×109/L (OR = 1.450, 95% CI: 1.094-1.922, p = 0.010) at baseline were related to the development of LLV. Conclusions: High HBV DNA/HBsAg quantification/LSM, low PLT, HBeAg positivity, and liver cirrhosis were high-risk factors associated with LLV in patients receiving entecavir treatment.

Switching from entecavir to tenofovir alafenamide for maintaining complete virological response in chronic hepatitis B.

Background and Aim: Hepatocellular carcinoma development can be decreased by achieving and maintaining complete virological response (CVR) in chronic hepatitis B. However, it is unclear whether switching from entecavir (ETV) to tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) could achieve and maintain CVR in patients with low-level viremia (LLV; HBV DNA ≤ 3.3 log IU/mL) or occasional detectable HBV DNA during ETV treatment. Therefore, we aimed to examine whether the switching from ETV to TAF is effective in achieving CVR in patients with LLV or occasional detectable HBV DNA. Methods: This study comprised 45 patients who switched from ETV to TAF. All patients received ETV and TAF for >2 years, and the HBV DNA levels were measured every 3 months. Maintaining undetectable HBV DNA during 2-year period is defined as CVR. The primary endpoint is the CVR rate during ETV and TAF treatment. Results: The CVR rate for each of the 2 years of ETV and TAF therapy was 33.3% (15/45) and 68.9% (31/45, P < 0.01), respectively, and the CVR rate increased by switching from ETV to TAF. In patients with occasional detectable HBV DNA during ETV treatment (22 patients), 15 achieved CVR and 7 maintained occasional detectable HBV DNA. In patients with LLV during ETV treatment (eight patients), three achieved CVR and five had occasional detectable HBV DNA. Conclusion: Switching from ETV to TAF increases the CVR rate in patients with LLV or occasional detectable HBV DNA and could be an alternative treatment option.

Real-world single-center experience with entecavir and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naïve and experienced patients with chronic hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The goal of antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is to improve survival of the patients by achieving a complete virological response (CVR). This study aimed to evaluate long-term efficacy of entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in nucleos(t)ide analog (NA)-naïve and NA-experienced Korean patients with CHB and to determine the incidence of cirrhosis-related complications in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed medical records of all patients treated with ETV or TDF from July 2007 to January 2017. We examined CVR and analyzed the predictive factors influencing the rate of CVR and evaluated the incidences of cirrhosis-related complications. RESULTS: The proportion of patients who achieved CVR was 94.2% in the ETV group and 91.1% in the TDF group (P = 0.358). Among patients who achieved CVR, the mean time to CVR was 13.5 ± 14.3 months in the ETV group and 11.5 ± 10.6 months in the TDF group (P = 0.169). Positive predictive factors for CVR included the current treatment with TDF, a low hepatitis B virus DNA level, negative hepatitis B e-antigen status, and high alanine aminotransferase level in baseline laboratory test. The annual incidence rate of HCC was 127 per 10,000 patient-years (1.27% per year) in ETV group, and 85 per 10,000 patient-years (0.85% per year) in TDF group (P = 0.526). CONCLUSION: Both ETV and TDF therapy resulted in a high CVR, and the annual incidence rates of HCC and other cirrhosis-related complications were not significantly different between the two treatment groups.

Efficacy of switching from adefovir to tenofovir in chronic hepatitis B patients who exhibit suboptimal responses to adefovir-based combination rescue therapy due to resistance to nucleoside analogues (SATIS study).

BACKGROUND/AIMS: It remains to be determined whether switching from adefovir (ADV) to tenofovir (TDF) provides better virological outcomes in patients exhibiting suboptimal responses to ADV plus nucleoside analogue (ADV+NA) therapy for NA-resistant chronic hepatitis B (CHB). METHODS: In this prospective trial, patients who showed partial responses (defined as serum hepatitis B virus [HBV] DNA >60 IU/mL) to ADV+NA therapy for NA resistance were randomly allocated to receive TDF plus NA (TDF+NA group, n=16) or to continue their current therapy (ADV+NA group, n=16). The primary end point was the proportion of patients with complete virological response (CVR, defined as serum HBV DNA <60 IU/mL) at 48 weeks. RESULTS: The median age was 52 years (16 men), and 28 were positive for hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg). The baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. The proportion with CVR was significantly higher in the TDF+NA group than in the ADV+NA group at 24 weeks (81.3% vs. 25.0%, P=0.001) and 48 weeks (87.5% vs. 37.5%, P=0.002). Furthermore, a decrease in the serum HBV DNA level of >2log10 IU/mL was more likely in the TDF+NA group at both 24 and 48 weeks (68.8% vs. 56.3%, P=0.014 vs. 81.3% vs. 56.3%, P=0.001, respectively). During the follow-up, the rate of HBeAg seroconversion was higher in the TDF+NA group than the ADV+NA group (12.5% vs. 6.25%, P=0.640), as was that for the hepatitis B surface antigen (6.25% vs. 0%, P=0.080). No serious adverse events due to antiviral agents occurred. CONCLUSION: In patients exhibiting suboptimal responses to ADV+NA therapy for NA-resistant CHB, switching from ADV to TDF might provide better virological outcomes.

Efficacy of switching from adefovir to tenofovir in chronic hepatitis B patients who exhibit suboptimal responses to adefovir-based combination rescue therapy due to resistance to nucleoside analogues (SATIS study)

BACKGROUND/AIMS: It remains to be determined whether switching from adefovir (ADV) to tenofovir (TDF) provides better virological outcomes in patients exhibiting suboptimal responses to ADV plus nucleoside analogue (ADV+NA) therapy for NA-resistant chronic hepatitis B (CHB). METHODS: In this prospective trial, patients who showed partial responses (defined as serum hepatitis B virus [HBV] DNA >60 IU/mL) to ADV+NA therapy for NA resistance were randomly allocated to receive TDF plus NA (TDF+NA group, n=16) or to continue their current therapy (ADV+NA group, n=16). The primary end point was the proportion of patients with complete virological response (CVR, defined as serum HBV DNA 2log10 IU/mL was more likely in the TDF+NA group at both 24 and 48 weeks (68.8% vs. 56.3%, P=0.014 vs. 81.3% vs. 56.3%, P=0.001, respectively). During the follow-up, the rate of HBeAg seroconversion was higher in the TDF+NA group than the ADV+NA group (12.5% vs. 6.25%, P=0.640), as was that for the hepatitis B surface antigen (6.25% vs. 0%, P=0.080). No serious adverse events due to antiviral agents occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In patients exhibiting suboptimal responses to ADV+NA therapy for NA-resistant CHB, switching from ADV to TDF might provide better virological outcomes.