Tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for the treatment of patients with HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B virus infection: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

Tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for the treatment of HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B virus infection: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

Switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide in virologically suppressed patients with chronic hepatitis B: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, multicentre non-inferiority study

Asia has intermediate-to-high prevalence and high morbidity of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. The use of guideline-recommended nucleos(t)ide analogs with high barrier to resistance, such as entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), is one of the key interventions for curbing HBV infection and associated morbidity in Asia. However, there are some challenges to the use of ETV and TDF; while ETV is associated with high resistance in lamivudine (LAM)-exposed (especially LAM-refractory) patients; bone and renal safety issues are a major concern with TDF. Hence, a panel of twenty-eight expert hepatologists from Asia convened, reviewed the literature, and developed the current expert opinion-based review article for the use of TAF in the resource-constrained settings in Asia. This article provides a comprehensive review of two large, phase 3, double-blind, randomized controlled trials of TAF versus TDF in HBeAg-negative (study 0108) and HBeAg-positive (study 0110) chronic HBV patients (> 70% Asians). These studies revealed as follows: (1) non-inferiority for the proportion of patients who had HBV DNA < 29 IU/mL; (2) significantly high rate of normalization of alanine aminotransferase levels; (3) no incidence of resistance; and (4) significantly better bone and renal safety, with TAF vs. TDF up to 144 weeks. Considering the benefits of TAF, the expert panel proposed recommendations for optimizing the use of TAF in Asia, along with guidance on specific patient groups at risk of renal or bone disease suitable for TAF therapy. The guidance provided in this article may help clinicians optimize the use of TAF in Asia.

HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B: From obscurity to prominence

Antiviral therapy after curative treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B infection: Is tenofovir or entecavir preferred?

Bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide versus dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for initial treatment of HIV-1 and hepatitis B coinfection (ALLIANCE): a double-blind, multicentre, randomised controlled, phase 3 non-inferiority trial

Is there any need for new, long-acting nucleos(t)ide analogues for the treatment of hepatitis B infection?

Author index

Evolution of nucleoside/tide analogues for hepatitis B: Is the ideal drug here yet?

Mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) is the primary cause of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Antiviral therapy is crucial to reduce MTCT for pregnant women with high viremia. Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) are the first-line antiviral drugs for hepatitis B. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of TAF and TDF in preventing HBV MTCT among treatment-naïve mothers. A total of 290 pregnant women with HBsAg positive for > 6 months, and HBV DNA ≥ 2 × 10^5 IU/ml or HBeAg positive were enrolled. Mothers received either TDF or TAF therapy and newborns received hepatitis B immunoglobulin and recombinant yeast hepatitis B vaccine. MTCT was evaluated during a one-year follow-up period after birth. 290 pregnant women (185 with TDF therapy and 105 with TAF therapy) and 296 newborns (190 in TDF group and 106 in TAF group) were included. Both TDF and TAF effectively deceased HBV DNA levels with no significant difference, and the MTCT rates in TDF group and TAF group were similarly low (1.08% vs. 0.95%, P > 0.05). Moreover, no congenital malformations or growth and developmental abnormalities in newborns were observed in either group. However, serum creatinine was significantly higher and eGFR decreased significantly when treated by TDF, whereas TAF showed no significant renal effects. Both TAF and TDF are effective in preventing HBV MTCT, with comparable MTCT rates. However, TAF demonstrated superior renal safety, making it a preferable option for preventing HBV MTCT in treatment-naïve mothers.

Background and study aimDuring the natural course of HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B (CHB), fluctuations in hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels are often observed, making the classification of patients difficult. We aimed to describe spontaneous short-term HBV DNA level fluctuations and to assess the usefulness of qHBsAg in Tunisian patients with HBeAg-negative chronic HBV infection. Patients and methodsWe included 174 treatment-naive Tunisian patients with HBeAg-negative chronic HBeAg-negative HBV infection. A prospective 1-year follow-up was conducted with serial determinations of HBV DNA, ALT levels, and qHBsAg. The patients were classified into three groups: inactive carriers (G1), patients with negative HBeAg CHB (G2), and patients with an “indeterminate state” (G3). For the latter group, a liver biopsy was indicated. ResultsOnly genotype D was detected. During follow-up, 21.6% and 19.5% of patients with a low initial (<2,000 IU/ml) and intermediate viral load (2,000–20,000 IU/ml) experienced a subsequent increase in their HBV DNA levels above 2,000 and 20,000 IU/ml, respectively. Significant variations in viral load were observed in 61.1% of patients at 6-month intervals. Among the 174 patients, 89 (51.1%) belonged to G1, 33 (19%) to G2, and 52 (29.9%) to G3. Fourteen patients have undergone a liver biopsy, of whom seven showed moderate to severe liver disease. Combination of HBV DNA < 2,000 IU/ml and qHBsAg < 832 IU/ml excluded CHB in 98.4% of cases. A cutoff point for qHBsAg < 100 IU/ml associated with an annual decline of > 0.5 log 10 IU/ml is a good predictor marker of functional cure for hepatitis B. ConclusionsThis study highlights the large short-term fluctuations in HBV DNA in patients with HBeAg-negative chronic HBeAg-negative HBV infection with genotype D. Thus, using the cutoff value of 832 for qHBsAg combined with that of 2,000 for HBV DNA makes it possible to exclude CHB for most patients.

Use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) improves patient outcomes in preventing mother-to-child transmission (pMTCT) of the hepatitis B virus (HBV) in mothers with chronic HBV and high viral loads. Given the lack of data for tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) in pMTCT, rates of early viral suppression with TAF and TDF were evaluated in women of childbearing potential (WOCBP) participating in 2 randomized, double-blind, Phase 3 studies in chronic HBV. In a patient subset meeting WOCBP criteria and with baseline HBV DNA >200,000 IU/mL, rates of viral suppression with TAF or TDF in achieving the target of HBV DNA <200,000 IU/mL at weeks 12 and 24 were assessed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors predictive of failure to suppress HBV DNA to the target level. In 275 of 1298 (21%) patients meeting WOCBP criteria with high viral load, 93% and 96% had HBV DNA <200,000 IU/mL at weeks 12 and 24, respectively. Results for TAF (n = 194) vs TDF (n = 81) treatment were similar at weeks 12 and 24 (94% vs. 90% and 97% vs. 93%), respectively. High baseline HBV DNA level, genotype D infection, and prior interferon (week 24 only) were predictive of failure to achieve the target level. Both treatments were well tolerated with TAF showing less impact on renal and bone parameters. In WOCBP with high VL, no differences were found between TAF and TDF in reducing HBV DNA to levels associated with lower transmission risk. These data support ongoing studies of TAF for pMTCT.

Background/PurposeUse of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) improves patient outcomes in preventing mother-to-child transmission (pMTCT) of the hepatitis B virus (HBV) in mothers with chronic HBV and high viral loads. Given the lack of data for tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) in pMTCT, rates of early viral suppression with TAF and TDF were evaluated in women of childbearing potential (WOCBP) participating in 2 randomized, double-blind, Phase 3 studies in chronic HBV.MethodsIn a patient subset meeting WOCBP criteria and with baseline HBV DNA >200,000 IU/mL, rates of viral suppression with TAF or TDF in achieving the target of HBV DNA <200,000 IU/mL at weeks 12 and 24 were assessed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors predictive of failure to suppress HBV DNA to the target level.ResultsIn 275 of 1298 (21%) patients meeting WOCBP criteria with high viral load, 93% and 96% had HBV DNA <200,000 IU/mL at weeks 12 and 24, respectively. Results for TAF (n = 194) vs TDF (n = 81) treatment were similar at weeks 12 and 24 (94% vs. 90% and 97% vs. 93%), respectively. High baseline HBV DNA level, genotype D infection, and prior interferon (week 24 only) were predictive of failure to achieve the target level. Both treatments were well tolerated with TAF showing less impact on renal and bone parameters.ConclusionsIn WOCBP with high VL, no differences were found between TAF and TDF in reducing HBV DNA to levels associated with lower transmission risk. These data support ongoing studies of TAF for pMTCT.

Hepatitis B Surface Antigen Loss: Too Little, Too Late and the Challenge for the Future

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a significant global health problem and > 42-52% of patients are infected during perinatal period. Tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) have been widely recognized as the main compounds used for antiviral treatment of hepatitis B. The present study evaluated the efficacy and safety of TAF in reducing HBV vertical transmission. A total of 72 pregnant women, who met the inclusion criteria, were randomly divided into the TDF (300mg/day, n = 36) and TAF (25mg/day, n = 36) groups. Clinical and laboratory data were analyzed and compared between the two groups. No significant differences in alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, blood creatinine and blood urea nitrogen levels were noted between the two groups after treatment. The serum HBV DNA viral load and hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) levels of the two groups were significantly decreased following treatment, whereas the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. The levels of urine retinol-binding protein and β2-microglobulin had no significant change after TAF treatment (p > 0.05), but increased significantly after TDF treatment (p < 0.05). All drug concentrations were undetectable in umbilical cord blood (UCB) and breast milk samples of the TAF group, while the drug concentration of UCB and breast milk samples in the TDF group was 2.98 ± 1.44 and 19.16 ± 15.26ng/ml, respectively. All infants were tested negative for serum hepatitis B surface antigen, HBV DNA, and HBeAg. Both TAF and TDF effectively block the mother-to-child transmission of hepatitis B. TAF was superior to TDF with regard to renal safety and breastfeeding.