The summaries are free for public
use. The Chronic Liver Disease
Foundation will continue to add and
archive summaries of articles deemed
relevant to CLDF by the Board of
Trustees and its Advisors.
Abstract Details
Efficacy and Safety of Tenofovir Plus Entecavir Combination Therapy Versus Tenofovir Monotherapy in Chronic Hepatitis B Virus Patients With Resistance or Partial Response to Entecavir: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Ali, Syed H (SH);Shah, Muhammad H (MH);Roy, Sakshi (S);Bharadwaj, Hareesha R (HR);Tan, Joecelyn K (JK);Rao, Medha S (MS);Fuad, Muhtasim (M);Ahluwalia, Arjun (A);Gaur, Aditya (A);Dalal, Priyal (P);Dhali, Arkadeep (A);Gopakumar, Harishankar (H);
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Chronic hepatitis B virus remains a significant cause of liver disease in the developing world, leading to sequelae such as hepatocellular carcinoma. While entecavir (ETV) serves as a first-line treatment, its growing resistance rates underscore the need to explore viable alternatives. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) monotherapy and entecavir plus tenofovir (TDF + ETV) combination therapy are both employed as treatments, but one's efficacy over another is in question. This meta-analysis aims to investigate any primacy of either treatment.
METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search across PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure from inception till 7th October 2024. Studies comparing the safety and efficacy of TDF monotherapy versus TDF + ETV combination therapy in patients resistant to entecavir were considered. Data about the virologic response (VR), virologic breakthrough, HbeAg seroconversion, HbeAg/HbsAg seroclearance, and alanine aminotransferase normalization were extracted. Relative risks (RRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, pooled, and analyzed in a random-effects model. -value <0.05 was regarded as significant for all analyses.
RESULTS: Nine studies, comprising 335 patients undergoing monotherapy and 352 patients undergoing combination therapy, satisfied the criteria. TDF + ETV combination therapy was found slightly advantageous to TDF monotherapy, stimulating a VR at 48 weeks (RR 1.081 95% CI: [1.001-1.167] = 0.046, I2 = 0%), along with the HbeAg seroconversion rate (RR 1.711 95% CI: [1.005-2.913] = 0.048, I2 = 0%). There were no significant adverse events in individual studies to warrant a meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: TDF + ETV shows slightly better efficacy to TDF monotherapy over a 48-week treatment regimen, with minimal safety concerns. However, further high-quality studies like randomized controlled trials are needed to further solidify conclusions, with this meta-analysis only achieving borderline significances.
REGISTRATION: This review is registered on the PROSPERO database (ID: CRD42024581443).
Stay Informed!
