Tenofovir Alafenamide Group Research Articles

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of switching to long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine versus continuing fixed-dose bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide in virologically suppressed adults with HIV, 12-month results (SOLAR): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b, non-inferiority trial

Cabotegravir plus rilpivirine is the only approved complete long-acting regimen for the maintenance of HIV-1 virological suppression dosed every 2 months. The SOLAR study aimed to compare long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine every 2 months with continued once-daily bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide for the maintenance of HIV-1 virological suppression in adults living with HIV. SOLAR is a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3b, non-inferiority study. The study was done in 118 centres across 14 countries. Participants with HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL were randomly assigned (2:1), stratified by sex at birth and BMI, to either long-acting cabotegravir (600 mg) plus rilpivirine (900 mg) dosed intramuscularly every 2 months or to continue daily oral bictegravir (50 mg), emtricitabine (200 mg), and tenofovir alafenamide (25 mg). Participants randomly assigned to long-acting therapy had a choice to receive cabotegravir (30 mg) plus rilpivirine (25 mg) once daily as an optional oral lead-in for approximately 1 month. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants with virological non-response (HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies per mL; the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, 4% non-inferiority margin; modified intention-to-treat exposed population) at month 11 (long-acting start with injections group) and month 12 (long-acting with oral lead-in group and bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group). The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04542070, and is ongoing. 837 participants were screened between Nov 9, 2020, and May 31, 2021, and 687 were randomly assigned to switch treatment or continue existing treatment. Of 670 participants (modified intention-to-treat exposed population), 447 (67%) switched to long-acting therapy (274 [61%] of 447 start with injections; 173 [39%] of 447 with oral lead-in) and 223 (33%) continued bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide. Baseline characteristics were similar; median age was 37 years (range 18-74), 118 (18%) of 670 were female sex at birth, 207 (31%) of 670 were non-White, and median BMI was 25·9 kg/m2 (IQR 23·3-29·5). At month 11-12, long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine showed non-inferior efficacy versus bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (HIV-1 RNA ≥50 copies per mL, five [1%] of 447 vs one [<1%] of 223), with an adjusted treatment difference of 0·7 (95% CI -0·7 to 2·0). Excluding injection site reactions, adverse events and serious adverse events were similar between groups. No treatment-related deaths occurred. More long-acting group participants had adverse events leading to withdrawal (25 [6%] of 454 vs two [1%] of 227). Injection site reactions were reported by 316 (70%) of 454 long-acting participants; most (98%) were grade 1 or 2. These data support the use of long-acting cabotegravir plus rilpivirine dosed every 2 months as a complete antiretroviral regimen that has similar efficacy to a commonly used integrase strand transfer inhibitor-based first-line regimen, while addressing unmet psychosocial issues associated with daily oral treatment. ViiV Healthcare.

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

For most adults with HIV-1 and hepatitis B virus (HBV) coinfection, initial recommended treatment is a tenofovir-containing antiretroviral regimen, but no randomised studies have compared tenofovir disoproxil fumarate with tenofovir alafenamide. We aimed to investigate whether bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide is non-inferior to dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for viral suppression in individuals with HIV-1 and HBV coinfection at 48 and 96 weeks. We did this randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial at 46 outpatient centres in China, Dominican Republic, Hong Kong, Japan, Malaysia, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, and the USA. Eligible participants were treatment-naive adults (aged ≥18 years) with plasma HIV-1 RNA of at least 500 copies per mL and plasma HBV DNA of at least 2000 IU/mL. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive daily oral bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg, or dolutegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate 300 mg, each with corresponding matching placebo. Randomisation was stratified by hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) status (positive vs negative), HBV DNA (<8 vs ≥8 log10 IU/mL), and CD4 count (<50 vs ≥50 cells per μL) at screening. All investigators, participants, and staff providing treatment, assessing outcomes, and collecting data were masked to study treatment for 96 weeks. Coprimary endpoints were the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL (defined by the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm) and plasma HBV DNA less than 29 IU/mL (using the missing-equals-failure approach) at week 48, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -12%. Coprimary endpoints were assessed in the full analysis set, which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one post-baseline HIV-1 RNA or HBV DNA result while on study drug. Safety endpoints were assessed in all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03547908. Between May 30, 2018 and March 16, 2021, 381 participants were screened, of whom 243 initiated treatment (121 in the receive bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group; 122 in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). At week 48, both endpoints met the criteria for non-inferiority: 113 (95%) of 119 participants in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group and 111 (91%) of 122 participants in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group had HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL (difference 4·1, 95% CI -2·5 to 10·8; p=0·21), and 75 (63%) of 119 participants in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group versus 53 (43%) of 122 participants in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group had HBV DNA suppression (difference 16·6, 5·9 to 27·3; nominal p=0·0023). Drug-related adverse events up to week 96 occurred in 35 (29%) of 121 participants in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group and 34 (28%) of 122 participants in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group. One (1%) of 121 participants in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group reported a serious adverse event (cryptococcal meningitis attributed to immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome) that was deemed to be treatment-related. Coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide is an effective therapy for adults with HIV-1 and HBV coinfection starting antiviral therapy. Gilead Sciences.

Tenofovir alafenamide versus entecavir for treating hepatitis B virus-related acute-on-chronic liver failure: real-world study.

Real-world data regarding hepatitis B virus-related acute-on-chronic liver failure (HBV-ACLF) patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) as an antiviral drug are limited. Hence, we evaluated the efficacy and kidney safety of TAF among this population. A total of 272 HBV-related ACLF patients hospitalized at Xiangya Hospital of Central South University were enrolled in this retrospective research. All patients received antiviral therapy with TAF (n = 100) or ETV (n = 172) and comprehensive medical treatments. Through 1:1 propensity score matching, 100 patients were finally included in each group. At week 48, the survival rates without transplantation of the TAF group and ETV group were 76.00 and 58.00%, separately (P = 0.007). After 4 weeks of treatment, the TAF treatment group exhibited a significantly decline in HBV DNA viral load (P = 0.029). The mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was apparently improved in the TAF group compared with the ETV group (TAF 5.98 ± 14.46 vs. ETV 1.18 ± 18.07 ml/min/1.73 m2) (P < 0.05). There were 6 patients in TAF group and 21 patients in ETV group with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage progression ≥ 1. By contrast, the ETV treatment group has a greater risk of renal function progression in CKD 1 stage patients (P < 0.05). This real-world clinical study showed that TAF is more effective than ETV in reducing viral load and improving survival rate in HBV-ACLF patients and the risk of renal function decline is lower. https://ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05453448.

Efficacy and safety of three antiretroviral therapy regimens started in pregnancy up to 50 weeks post partum: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

Drugs taken during pregnancy can affect maternal and child health outcomes, but few studies have compared the safety and virological efficacy of different antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens. We report the primary safety outcomes from enrolment up to 50 weeks post partum and a secondary virological efficacy outcome at 50 weeks post partum of three commonly used ART regimens for HIV-1. In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, we enrolled pregnant women aged 18 years or older with confirmed HIV-1 infection at 14-28 weeks of gestation. Women were enrolled at 22 clinical research sites in nine countries (Botswana, Brazil, India, South Africa, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, the USA, and Zimbabwe). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to one of three oral regimens: dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide; dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; or efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. Up to 14 days of antepartum ART before enrolment was permitted. Women with known multiple gestation, fetal anomalies, acute significant illness, transaminases more than 2·5 times the upper limit of normal, or estimated creatinine clearance of less than 60 mL/min were excluded. Primary safety analyses were pairwise comparisons between ART regimens of the proportion of maternal and infant adverse events of grade 3 or higher up to 50 weeks post partum. Secondary efficacy analyses at 50 weeks post partum included a comparison of the proportion of women with plasma HIV-1 RNA of less than 200 copies per mL in the combined dolutegravir-containing groups versus the efavirenz-containing group. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population, which included all randomly assigned participants with available data. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03048422. Between Jan 19, 2018, and Feb 8, 2019, we randomly assigned 643 pregnant women to the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group (n=217), the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (n=215), and the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (n=211). At enrolment, median gestational age was 21·9 weeks (IQR 18·3-25·3), median CD4 count was 466 cells per μL (308-624), and median HIV-1 RNA was 903 copies per mL (152-5183). 607 (94%) women and 566 (92%) of 617 liveborn infants completed the study. Up to the week 50 post-partum visit, the estimated probability of experiencing an adverse event of grade 3 or higher was 25% in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group; 31% in the dolutegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group; and 28% in the efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group (no significant difference between groups). Among infants, the estimated probability of experiencing at least one adverse event of grade 3 or higher by postnatal week 50 was 28% overall, with small and non-statistically significant differences between groups. By postnatal week 50, 14 infants whose mothers were in the efavirenz-containing group (7%) died, compared with six in the combined dolutegravir groups (1%). 573 (89%) women had HIV-1 RNA data available at 50 weeks post partum: 366 (96%) in the dolutegravir-containing groups and 186 (96%) in the efavirenz-containing group had HIV-1 RNA less than 200 copies per mL, with no significant difference between groups. Safety and efficacy data during pregnancy and up to 50 weeks post partum support the current recommendation of dolutegravir-based ART (particularly in combination with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide) rather than efavirenz, emtricitabine, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, when started in pregnancy. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the National Institute of Mental Health.

Comparison of kidney function decline between chronic hepatitis B patients with or without antiviral therapy.

Kidney function can deteriorate in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). We compared the risk of kidney function decline between untreated and treated CHB patients receiving antiviral therapy. This retrospective study included 1061 untreated CHB patients and 366 tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), 190 besifovir dipivoxil maleate (BSV), and 2029 entecavir (ETV) users. The primary outcome was kidney function decline, a ≥ one-stage increase in chronic kidney disease for ≥3 consecutive months. The incidence and risk of kidney function decline were significantly higher in the 1:1 propensity score matched treated group (588 pairs) than in the untreated (2.7 per 1000 person-years [PYs] vs. 1.3 per 1000 PYs, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 2.29, all p < 0.001). The matched TAF group (222 pairs) showed a similar risk for the primary outcome (aHR = 1.89, p = 0.107) despite a significantly higher incidence thereof, compared to the untreated (3.9 vs. 1.9 per 1000 PYs, p = 0.042). The matched BSV and untreated groups (107 pairs) showed no significant differences in the incidence and risk. However, ETV users (541 pairs) carried a significantly higher outcome incidence and risk than the matched untreated (3.6 vs. 1.1 per 1000 PYs, aHR = 1.05, all p < 0.001). Compared to each matched untreated group, changes in the estimated glomerular filtration rate over time were greater in the ETV group (p = 0.010), despite being similar in the TAF (p = 0.073) and BSV groups (p = 0.926). Compared with untreated patients, TAF or BSV users showed similar risk, whereas ETV users showed a higher risk of kidney function decline.

Chronic Hepatitis B Relapse Rates after Cessation of Tenofovir Alafenamide and Entecavir Therapy

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) relapse occurs after the cessation of nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUC) therapy due to the waning of viral suppression. Few studies have investigated the viral relapse rate and clinical relapse rate after tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) therapy. We compared the CHB relapse rate between TAF and entecavir therapy. We enrolled patients with chronic hepatitis B who underwent TAF or entecavir therapy. NUC therapy was terminated after HBeAg loss for 1 year in HBeAg-positive patients and after undetectable serum HBV DNA on three separate tests each >6 months apart in HBeAg-negative patients. After cessation of NUC therapy, we followed alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels at 12, 24, and 48 weeks. Serum HBV DNA levels were checked if patients showed a two-fold elevation from the upper limit of normal ALT levels (41 IU/mL). Clinical relapse (CR) was defined as a two-fold elevation in ALT levels and HBV DNA levels > 2000 IU/mL. We then investigated the CR rate of HBV after cessation of TAF and entecavir therapy at 12, 24, and 48 weeks. Of the 117 patients enrolled, 78 were in the entecavir group and 39 were in the TAF group. At 12 weeks after cessation of NUC therapy, no patients had HBV CR in the entecavir group. However, three patients (CR cumulative rate 7.9%) had CR in the TAF group. At 24 weeks, the CR cumulative rate in the entecavir and TAF groups were 1.3% and 13.2%, respectively (p < 0.05). At 48 weeks, the CR cumulative rates were 9.2% and 24.2%, respectively (p = 0.055). Patients in the TAF group had a higher cumulative rate of CR than those in the entecavir group (log-rank p = 0.023). Furthermore, patients in the TAF group had earlier CR times than those in the entecavir group, especially in the first 24 weeks after cessation of therapies (p < 0.05). The cessation of TAF therapy had significantly earlier and higher CR rates than that of entecavir therapy. Close monitoring of liver function and HBV DNA levels may be necessary, especially within 24 weeks after cessation of TAF therapy.

Dynamics of Lipid Profile in Antiretroviral-Naïve HIV-Infected Patients, Treated with TAF-Based Regimens: A Multicenter Observational Study.

Background: The introduction of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) in antiretroviral therapy has deeply modified the choice of the backbone for different treatment regimens, allowing the prevention of the bone and renal toxicity that was related to the previous formulation of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). At the same time, literature data show an onset of dyslipidemia after a switch from TDF to TAF. To better understand the possible role of TAF in dyslipidemia, antiretroviral-naïve HIV-infected patients were evaluated, comparing those treated with TAF/emtricitabine with those with abacavir/lamivudine. Methods: We enrolled 270 antiretroviral-naïve HIV-infected patients in an observational, retrospective, longitudinal, multicenter study; they started treatment from 2017 to 2019 and were followed up for at least 72 weeks. We divided patients into two groups, one treated with a TAF-based backbone in their antiretroviral regimens (TAF group) and one without TAF (NO TAF group), to evaluate possible differences in the dynamics of lipid profiles from baseline(T0) to week 24 (T24), 48 (T48) and 72 (T72). Results: No significant differences were observed at baseline between the 2 groups. In the TAF group we observed a significant development of hypercholesterolemia throughout the follow-up (p &lt; 0.0001), not evident in the NO TAF group, that instead showed a significant increase in high-density lipoprotein (HDL). There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and cardiovascular risk index (CRI). A cholesterol-lowering treatment with statin, finally, was prescribed in 6 patients in both groups during the study. At binary logistic regression analysis, no factor was independently associated with hypercholesterolemia, except for higher age at T0. Conclusions: This real-life study shows that in HIV-naïve patients, TAF was associated with hypercholesterolemia throughout the follow-up. The clinical significance of this hypercholesterolemia will have to be clarified in further studies.

Comparison of the side effects of antivirals in chronic hepatitis B patients: a single-center experience.

Entecavir (ETV), Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate (TDF), and Tenofovir Alafenamide (TAF) have been approved for treating Chronic Hepatitis B (CHB) and recommended due to their high safety profile and high resistance barriers. This study aimed to evaluate the kidney functions, bone, and metabolic parameters in CHB patients receiving ETV, TDF, and TAF treatment. In this retrospective cohort study, a total of 469 CHB patients who were treated with TDF (n = 256), ETV (n = 184), or TAF (n = 129) for at least six months between March 2012 and March 2022, were enrolled. No significant difference was observed between three groups regarding ALT normalization, HBV DNA suppression, and HBs Ag seroconversion (p = 0.15, p = 0.26, p = 0.72). After the treatment, there was a significant decrease in GFR values in the TDF, ETV, and TAF groups (p<0.01, p = 0.01, p = 0.01, respectively). No significant improvement was observed in the GFR values after TAF treatment in 77 patients who had switched from TDF to TAF (p = 0.51). Moreover, no significant decrease in bone mineral densities was observed in the TDF, ETV, and TAF groups (p = 0.24, p = 0.41, p = 0.95, respectively). There was no significant difference between the three groups in metabolic parameters (serum glucose, lipid profile, calcium and phosphorus levels, etc.) when the data were adjusted for underlying comorbidities. ETV, TDF, and TAF are comparably safe and effective antiviral agents against CHB.

Efficacy and Renal Safety of Prophylactic Tenofovir Alafenamide for HBV-Infected Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy.

There are no data comparing the efficacy and safety of prophylactic entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) for HBV-infected cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and renal safety of ETV, TDF and TAF in this setting. HBsAg-positive cancer patients treated with ETV (n = 582), TDF (n = 200) and TAF (n = 188) during chemotherapy were retrospectively enrolled. Antiviral efficacy and risk of renal events were evaluated. The rate of complete viral suppression at 1 year was 94.7%, 94.7% and 96.1% in ETV, TDF and TAF groups, respectively (p = 0.877). A significant proportion of patients developed renal dysfunction during chemotherapy. The incidences of acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease stage migration were comparable among the ETV, TDF and TAF groups. TAF was relatively safe in patients with predisposing factors of AKI, including hypoalbuminemia and cisplatin use. In patients who were switched from TDF to TAF during chemotherapy, the renal function remained stable and viral suppression was well maintained after switching. In conclusion, TAF had good renal safety and comparable efficacy with ETV and TDF for HBV-infected cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Switching from TDF to TAF during chemotherapy is safe, without a loss of efficacy.

Similar risk of kidney function decline between tenofovir alafenamide and besifovir dipivoxil maleate in chronic hepatitisB.

Although tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) and besifovir dipivoxil maleate (BSV) are potent antiviral agents in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) infection, their renal safety profiles have not been previously compared. This study compared the risk of kidney function decline among patients with treatment-naïve CHB treated with TAF or BSV. This multicenter, retrospective, longitudinal cohort study included 556 patients with treatment-naïve CHB treated with TAF (n=366) or BSV (n=190) between November 2017 and August 2021. The primary outcome was chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression, defined as an increase in CKD stage by at least one stage for at least three consecutive months. 1:1 Propensity score matching yielded 154 patients in each treatment group. The mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 100.4 vs. 100.3 ml/min/1.73 m2 in the TAF and BSV groups respectively. A total of 25 patients developed a progression in CKD stage ≥1, of which 13 and 12 patients were from the TAF and BSV treated groups respectively (3.1 vs. 3.3 per 1000 person-years; p=.751). The unadjusted hazard ratio for risk of progression in CKD stage ≥1 of the BSV group (vs. the TAF group) was 1.13 (95% confidence interval, 0.50-2.58; p=.758). This association persisted even after adjusting for potential confounders. Virological, serological and biochemical responses were also similar between the two treatment groups (all p > .05). TAF and BSV showed a similar risk of kidney function decline in patients with treatment-naïve CHB. Further prospective randomized studies are warranted for validation.

Retreatment Efficacy and Renal Safety of Tenofovir Alafenamide, Entecavir, and Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate After Entecavir or Tenofovir Cessation.

We aimed to compare the one-year retreatment efficacy and renal safety of entecavir, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) after HBV relapse in patients who discontinued entecavir or TDF. This retrospective study included 289 chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients without cirrhosis who received entecavir (n = 93), TDF (n = 103), or TAF (n = 86) retreatment for at least 12months after entecavir or TDF cessation. The rate of virological response (HBV DNA < 20IU/mL) at 12months of retreatment was 79/93 (84.9%) in the entecavir group, 92/103 (89.3%) in the TDF group, and 72/86 (83.7%) in the TAF group. The rate of ALT normalization (ALT ≤ 40 U/L) after 12months of retreatment was 76/93 (81.7%) in the entecavir group, 77/103 (74.7%) in the TDF group , and 73/86 (84.9%) in the TAF group. There was no significant difference in the rates of virological response (p = 0.495) and ALT normalization (p = 0.198) among the three groups. Multivariate analysis showed thatlower HBV DNA and HBsAg levels at baseline were independently associated with virological response at 12months of retreatment. The TDF group (37.8 ± 34.8 U/L) had higher ALT levels at 12months of retreatment than the TAF (27. ± 17.9 U/L, p = 0.015) and entecavir (28.3 ± 19.3 U/L, p = 0.022) groups. In patients with eGFR 60-90mL/min/1.73 m2, eGFR change between baseline and 12months of retreatment increased in the entecavir and TAF groups and decreased in the TDF group. TAF could be one of the retreatment options for retreatment of HBV relapse after entecavir or TDF cessation.

Efficacy and safety of tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment‐naïve chronic hepatitis B

We used real-world data to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in treatment-naïve patients with CHB. We analysed 2747 patients with CHB under TAF (n=502) or TDF (n=2245) treatments. Virological responses (VR: HBV DNA <15 IU/ml), on-treatment ALT normalization, the incidence of HCC, renal function and lipid profiles were compared between these groups. Propensity score matching of 495 pairs was conducted for these comparisons. The mean age of the total cohort was 48.6 years and 58.2% of the subjects were male. Cirrhosis had a 33.3% prevalence in the population. VRs at 12, 24 and 36months were achieved in 70.3%, 81.2% and 83.3% of the TAF and 67.9%, 84.3% and 86.1% in the TDF cases respectively (p > 0.05 for all). Normalized ALT, as determined by local laboratory criteria (<40 U/L), occurred in 79.7%, 90.6% and 86.2% of TAF the group and 78.2%, 85.8% and 85.7% of the TDF group at 12, 24 and 36months respectively (p > 0.05 for all). The HCC risk did not statistically differ across the entire cohort or in the PS-matched cohort. The TAF group showed a lower median increase in serum creatinine from baseline during the early study period. Compared with the TAF, the TDF group showed significant decreases in total cholesterol, triglyceride and HDL, but not in LDL. Real-word data indicate that TAF has comparable efficacies to TDF in terms of VR and ALT normalization, with no higher risk of HCC.

Changes in blood lipids in patients with chronic hepatitis B after 48 weeks of tenofovir alafenamide treatment: A prospective real-world clinical study

Background Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is a new anti-hepatitis B virus nucleotide analogue that can cause dyslipidaemia in AIDS patients, but the effect of TAF on blood lipids in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of TAF on blood lipid levels in patients with CHB. Methods One hundred and twenty-one CHB patients were recruited as TAF group, including 69 treatment-naïve patients and 52 patients with nucleoside/nucleotide analogue experience before TAF treatment. All patients were followed up regularly for 48 weeks. Total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and triglyceride (TG) levels and the incidence of dyslipidaemia before and after TAF treatment were compared. Results After 48 weeks of TAF treatment, the levels of TC, TGs and LDL-C in TAF group were significantly higher than those in control group. In TAF group, the TC and TG levels were significantly higher than that at baseline. Baseline TC and TGs levels had a significant effect on the incidence of abnormal TC and TG levels after 48 weeks treatment. The LDL-C decreased slightly but not significantly. The proportion of patients with TC abnormalities increased from 20.7% at baseline to 26.3% at week 48, LDL-C abnormalities decreased from 50.4% to 42.5% and TG abnormalities increased from 14.2% to 22.5%. There were no significant differences compared with control group, as well as compared with baseline. Conclusions Tenofovir alafenamide treatment mainly affects the TC and TG level in patients with CHB but has little effect on LDL-C.

Higher risk of kidney function decline with entecavir than tenofovir alafenamide in patients with chronic hepatitis B.

Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) are the preferred agents in patients with predisposing factors for nephrotoxicity, but no studies to date have directly compared the renal safety of the two antiviral agents. Hence, we compared the risk of kidney function decline among patients with treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B (CHB) treated with ETV or TAF. This study included 1988 patients with treatment-naïve CHB who were treated with ETV (n = 1839) or TAF (n = 149) between 2007 and 2020 for ETV and between 2017 and 2020 for TAF. The primary outcome was chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression, defined as an increase in CKD stage by at least one stage for at least three consecutive months. A 1:1 propensity score match yielded 149 patients in each treatment group. The mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 100.6ml/min/1.73m2 vs. 101.3ml/min/1.73m2 in the ETV and TAF groups respectively. A total of 61 patients developed a progression in CKD stage≥1, of which 47 and 14 patients were from the ETV- and TAF-treated groups respectively (19.9 vs. 5.1 per 1000 person-years; p<.001). The risk of progression in CKD stage ≥1 was significantly higher in patients treated with ETV, even when adjusted for potential confounders (adjusted hazard ratio 4.05; 95% CI 2.14-7.68; p<.001). ETV was associated with a higher risk of kidney function decline than TAF in patients with treatment-naïve CHB. Therefore, further prospective randomized studies are needed.

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

Background/AimsTenofovir 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.MethodsA 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).ResultsFollowing 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.ConclusionsTDF 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.

Tenofovir Alafenamide for Pregnant Chinese Women With Active Chronic Hepatitis B: A Multicenter Prospective Study

Data on long-term tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) therapy for pregnant women with active chronic hepatitis B (CHB) (immune clearance and reactivation phases, currently and previously diagnosed) and their infants are lacking. Pregnant women with active CHB treated with TAF and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) were enrolled in this multicenter prospective study, and infants received immunoprophylaxis. The primary outcomes were rates of adverse (safety) events in pregnant women and defects in infants and fetuses. The secondary outcomes were virologic responses in pregnant women, infants' safety, hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) status, and growth conditions. One hundred three and 104 pregnant women were enrolled and 102 and 104 infants were born in the TAF and TDF groups, respectively. In the TAF group, the mean age, gestational age, alanine aminotransferase level, and viral loads at treatment initiation were 29.3 years, 1.3 weeks, 122.2 U/L, and 5.1 log10 IU/mL, respectively. TAF was well-tolerated, and the most common adverse event was nausea (29.1%) during a mean of 2 years of treatment. Notably, 1 (1.0%) TAF-treated pregnant woman underwent induced abortion due to noncausal fetal cleft lip and palate. No infants in either group had birth defects. In the TAF group, the hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion rate was 20.7% at postpartum month 6, infants had normal growth parameters, and no infants were positive for HBsAg at 7 months. The TDF group had comparable safety and effectiveness profiles. TAF administered throughout or beginning in early pregnancy is generally safe and effective for pregnant women with active CHB and their infants.

Real-World Single-Center Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Entecavir, Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate, and Tenofovir Alafenamide in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B

Introduction: Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is a major cause of chronic liver diseases and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), and entecavir (ETV) are recommended as primary treatments. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ETV, TDF, and TAF in a real-world clinical setting. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, a total of 363 CHB patients who were treated with ETV (n = 163), TDF (n = 154), or TAF (n = 46) from July 2007 to September 2019 were enrolled. Results: Median patient age was 51 years and 66.4% of patients were male. Median duration of treatment with ETV, TDF, or TAF was 49.0 months (interquartile range, 27.0–74.0 months). In terms of safety, cholesterol was mildly increased in the ETV and TAF groups and significantly lowered in the TDF group than baseline (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in liver cirrhosis-related complications among the 3 groups at 48 weeks (p = 0.235). Hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion, complete virological response, and alanine aminotransferase normalization at 48 weeks as measures of treatment efficacy were not significantly different among the 3 groups (p = 0.142, 0.538, and 0.520, respectively). There was also no significant difference in cumulative incidence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) between the ETV and TDF groups (p = 0.894). Conclusions: ETV, TDF, and TAF were safe antiviral agents and showed similar antiviral effect for CHB at 48 weeks. Cirrhosis-related complications and annual HCC incidence rates did not differ significantly between the ETV and TDF groups over the 48 week follow-up period.

Effect of tenofovir alafenamide vs. tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on hepatocellular carcinoma risk in chronic hepatitis B.

It is unclear whether tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) or tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is more effective for preventing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). In this study, we compared the effectiveness of these two antiviral agents for preventing HCC. We included treatment-naïve CHB patients undergoing antiviral therapy with TDF only (TDF group) or a TAF-based regimen (TAF group) at three academic teaching hospitals from 2012 to 2019. The TAF group included patients receiving TAF as first-line treatment and patients switching from TDF to TAF. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis or HCC at enrollment were excluded. Cumulative probabilities of HCC were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methodology. In total, 2,117 patients were included: 1,832 in the TDF group and 285 in the TAF group. The annual HCC incidence was not significantly different between TDF and TAF groups: 1.66 vs. 1.19 per 100 person-years [PY], respectively (multivariate analysis: adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.774 [reference: TDF group]; p=.438). Male, liver cirrhosis, hepatitis B e antigen negativity, Fibrosis-4 index>3.25 and low albumin were independently associated with a higher risk of HCC. Propensity score-matched and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses yielded similar results: 1.56 vs. 1.19 per 100 PY, respectively (HR 1.175; p=.708) and 1.66 vs. 1.29 per 100 PY, respectively (HR 0.888; p=.446). The risk of HCC development was not significantly different between TDF and TAF groups of CHB patients. Further studies with a larger sample size and longer follow-up are required to validate our results.

Impact of tenofovir alafenamide vs. entecavir on hepatocellular carcinoma risk in patients with chronic hepatitis B.

Whether entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is better at preventing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development among patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) remains unclear. The present study was conducted to explore the ability of these two antivirals to prevent HCC. From 2012 to 2019, treatment-naïve CHB patients undergoing ETV or TAF therapy were recruited at three academic teaching hospitals. The TAF group comprised patients starting TAF as first-line antiviral and those switching antivirals from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to TAF. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis or HCC at enrollment were excluded from the analysis. Cumulative probabilities of HCC were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. In total, 1810 patients (1525 and 285 in ETV and TAF groups, respectively) were recruited. The annual HCC incidence was statistically not different between the ETV and TAF groups (1.67 vs. 1.19 per 100 person-years, respectively) with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.681 (p = 0.255), as determined by multivariate analysis. Male, hypertension, liver cirrhosis, FIB-4 index, and albumin were independent prognostic factors for HCC development. Propensity score-matched and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses yielded similar results, with non-statistically different HCC incidence between the ETV and TAF groups (1.07 vs. 1.19 per 100 person-years (HR = 0.973; p = 0.953) and 1.67 vs. 1.89 per 100 person-years, respectively (HR = 0.949; p = 0.743). These findings suggest that ETV- and TAF-treated CHB patients have similar risk of developing HCC. Further studies with the larger sample size and longer follow-up are needed to validate these results.

Long-term safety and efficacy of emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide vs emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV-1 pre-exposure prophylaxis: week 96 results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

In DISCOVER, a multinational, randomised controlled trial, emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide compared with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate showed non-inferior efficacy for HIV prevention and improved bone mineral density and renal safety biomarkers at week 48. We report outcomes analysed after all participants had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. This study is an ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done at 94 community, public health, and hospital-associated clinics located in Europe and North America. Adult cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men, both with a high risk of acquiring HIV as determined by self-reported sexual behaviour or recent sexually transmitted infections, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (200/25 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide group), or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (200/300 mg) tablets daily, with matched placebo tablets (emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group). The primary efficacy outcome was incident HIV infection. Incidence of HIV-1 infection per 100 person-years was assessed when the last participant had completed 96 weeks of follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02842086. Between Sept 13, 2016, and June 30, 2017, 5387 participants were randomly assigned to receive emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (n=2694) or emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n=2693), contributing 10 081 person-years of follow-up. At 96 weeks of follow-up, there were eight HIV infections in participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (0·16 infections per 100 person-years [95% CI 0·07-0·31]) and 15 in participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (0·30 infections per 100 person-years [0·17-0·49]). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide maintained its non-inferiority to emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for HIV prevention (IRR 0·54 [95% CI 0·23-1·26]). Approximately 78-82% of participants reported taking study medication more than 95% of the time across all study visits. Rates of sexually transmitted infections remained high and similar across groups (21 cases per 100 person-years for rectal gonorrhoea and 28 cases per 100 person-years for rectal chlamydia). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide continued to show superiority over emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in all but one of the six prespecified bone mineral density and renal biomarkers. There was more weight gain among participants who had received emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide (median weight gain 1·7 kg vs 0·5 kg, p<0·0001). Emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide is safe and effective for longer-term pre-exposure prophylaxis in cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men. Gilead Sciences.