Search

Background: Phase 3 studies in patients with chronic hepatitis B have shown tenofovir alafenamide to have non-inferior efficacy to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, with improved renal and bone safety. We conducted this study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of switching to tenofovir alafenamide in participants with chronic hepatitis B and renal or hepatic impairment., Methods: This open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study was done in eight countries or territories at 30 sites. We recruited adults (≥18 years) with chronic hepatitis B who were virally suppressed on nucleoside or nucleotide analogues and had renal impairment (part A: moderate or severe in cohort 1 [estimated glomerular filtration rate by the Cockcroft-Gault formula (eGFR CG ) 15-59 mL/min] or end-stage renal disease [eGFR CG <15 mL/min] on haemodialysis in cohort 2) or hepatic impairment including decompensation (part B: Child-Turcotte-Pugh score 7-12). Participants switched to 25 mg of tenofovir alafenamide given orally once daily for 96 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with viral suppression (HBV DNA <20 IU/mL) at week 24 by missing-equals-failure analysis. Efficacy (full analysis set) and safety (safety analysis set) analyses included all enrolled participants who received at least one dose of the study drug. Week 96 safety was assessed, including renal and bone parameters. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03180619, and is completed., Findings: 124 participants (93 in part A [78 in cohort 1 and 15 in cohort 2] and 31 in part B) were enrolled between Aug 11, 2017, and Oct 17, 2018, and included in the full and safety analysis sets. 106 (85%) participants completed the study. There were 69 (74%) men and 24 (26%) women in part A and 21 (68%) men and ten (32%) women in part B. At week 24, 91 (97·8%, 95% CI 92·4 to 99·7) of 93 individuals in part A (76 [97·4%, 91·0 to 99·7] of 78 in cohort 1 and 15 [100·0%, 78·2 to 100·0] of 15 in cohort 2) and 31 (100·0%, 88·8 to 100·0) in part B had HBV DNA of less than 20 IU/mL. By week 96, the most common adverse event was upper respiratory tract infection, which occurred in 14 (15%) participants in part A and in six (19%) participants in part B. Serious adverse events occurred in 20 (22%) part A participants and in ten (32%) part B participants; none were related to treatment. No treatment-related deaths occurred. At week 96, median change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (Cockcroft-Gault method) was 1·0 mL/min (IQR -2·8 to 4·5) in cohort 1 and -2·4 mL/min (-11·4 to 10·7) in part B. Mean changes in spine and hip bone mineral density were 1·02% (SD 4·44) and 0·20% (3·25) in part A and -0·25% (3·91) and 0·28% (3·25) in part B., Interpretation: Tenofovir alafenamide might offer continued antiviral efficacy and a favourable safety profile for patients with renal or hepatic impairment and chronic hepatitis B switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or other antivirals., Funding: Gilead Sciences., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests HLAJ has received grants from Gilead Sciences, GSK, Janssen, Roche, and Vir Biotechnology and consults for Aligos, Gilead Sciences, GSK, Janssen, Roche, Vir Biotechnology, and Precision Biosciences. Y-SL receives consulting fees and honoraria from Gilead Sciences. PL reports honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, and manuscript writing or educational events from AbbVie, Aligos, Alnylam, Altona, Antios, Arrowhead, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eiger, Gilead Sciences, Grifols, GSK, Janssen, MSD, MYR Pharmaceuticals, Roboscreen, Roche, Spring Bank Pharmaceuticals, and Vir Biotechnology. JH has received grant support from Roche, consultant fees from AbbVie Korea, payments or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Oncolys, AstraZeneca, Gilead, Roche, and Yuhan Korea, and payments for expert testimony from Surrozen; has participated in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Medvir; and has participated in other boards or groups for AstraZeneca. CSC reports grants or research support from Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Altimmune, GSK, and Roche; consulting fees from Gilead Sciences, Roche, GSK, and Altimmune; honoraria from ECHO HBV Global and PRIME Education; US and international patent applications for polypeptides used against viral infection; advisory board or data safety monitoring board participation with Altimmune; and receipt of woodchuck reagents from Gilead Sciences. HT has served as a speaker and advisor for, received research grants from, and holds stock in Gilead Sciences, and has received research grants from Intercept and Assembly Biosciences. JFF, FA, YZ, YL, and AL are employees of and stockholders in Gilead Sciences. PG was an employee of and stockholder in Gilead Sciences at the time of this study and holds stock in Cytokinetics. KA has previously received research grants from Gilead, Roche, and MSD; serves as an advisor for Aligos, Arbutus, Assembly, AbbVie, Biotest, Bluejay, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Surrozen, and Vir Biotechnology; has received honoraria for lectures, speaker's bureaus, or other educational events for GSK; and participated in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for DrugFarm. EG received speaking fees from AbbVie and Gilead Sciences and participated in advisory boards for AbbVie, Aligos, Assembly, Gilead Sciences, GSK, Intellia, Janssen, Roche, Vir Biotechnology, Virion, and Vaccitech. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background & Aims: Antiviral therapy may attenuate the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). We aimed to explore how tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) affect HCC risk in patients with CHB., Methods: The REACH-B, aMAP, and mPAGE-B models were utilized to assess HCC risk in patients with CHB from two global randomized-controlled trials evaluating the impact of TAF vs. TDF treatment. Standard incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated using data from the REACH-B model as a ratio of observed HCC cases in the TAF- or TDF-treated patients vs. predicted HCC cases for untreated historical controls. Proportions of treated patients shifting aMAP and mPAGE-B risk categories between baseline and Week 240 were calculated., Results: Of the 1,632 patients (TAF, n = 1,093; TDF, n = 539) followed for up to 300 weeks, 22 HCC cases developed. Those receiving TAF had an SIR that was lower compared to the SIR of individuals receiving TDF: 0.32 ( p <0.001) vs. 0.56 ( p  = 0.06). In the general study population, individuals without cirrhosis at baseline had an SIR that was lower compared to the SIR of individuals with cirrhosis at baseline: 0.37 ( p <0.001) vs. 0.58 ( p  = 0.15). Of the patients at low risk of HCC at baseline, the majority (97%) remained low risk by mPAGE-B and aMAP scoring at Week 240. Among those at medium or high risk at baseline, substantial portions shifted to a lower risk category by Week 240 (mPAGE-B: 22% and 42%; aMAP: 39% and 63%, respectively)., Conclusions: This evaluation provides evidence that treatment with TAF or TDF can reduce HCC risk in patients with CHB, particularly in patients without cirrhosis., Impact and Implications: Despite the substantial impact of HCC on long-term outcomes of patients with CHB, the differential risk of HCC development among those receiving treatment with TAF vs. TDF has not been well elucidated. Using three validated risk prediction models, we found that TAF is at least as effective as TDF in reducing HCC risk in patients with CHB. While TDF is well-studied in the context of HCC risk reduction, our novel findings underscore the effectiveness of TAF as a treatment option for patients with CHB., Clinical Trial Numbers: NCT01940341; NCT02836249; NCT01940471; NCT02836236., Competing Interests: AJH: There are no financial disclosures for this author. CP: Has served as a speaker for Gilead and received research grants from Gilead. DRS: There are no financial disclosures for this author. EG: Member of scientific advisory boards for AbbVie, Abbott Diagnostics, Aligos, Arbutus, Arrowhead, Assembly, Avalia, Clear B Therapeutics, Dicerna, Enanta, Gilead Sciences, GSK, Intellia, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Genentech-Roche, Vaccitech, Ventorx, Vir Bio and Virion Therapeutics. FA: Gilead Sciences employee and stock ownership. HJ: Received grants from: AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, GSK, Janssen, Roche, Vir Biotechnology Inc. Is a consultant for: Aligos, Antios, Arbutus, Eiger, Gilead Sciences, GSK, Janssen, Merck, Roche, VBI Vaccines, Vir Biotechnology Inc., Viroclinics. HC: Has served as an advisor for Aligos, Arbutus, Hepion, Janssen, Gilead, GSK, Roche, Vaccitech, Vir Biotechnology, Virion Therapeutic, and as a speaker for Gilead, Roche, and Mylan. HW: Employee and stockholder for Gilead. JF: Employee and stockholder for Gilead. JK: Consultant for Abbvie, Abbott, Gilead Sciences, Roche and Sysmex. On speaker’s bureaus for Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, and Fujirebio. JH: Has received consulting fee from AbbVie, Arbutus, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead Sciences, Johnson & Johnson, Roche and received grants from Bristol Myers Squibb and Johnson & Johnson. KA: Aligos, Assembly, Bluejay, BMS, BI, DrugFarm, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Merck, Roche, Sobi. LJY: Employee of Gilead Sciences and own stock in Gilead Sciences. MB: Has served as an advisor for Abbvie, Arbutus, Assembly, Janssen, Gilead, GSK, Roche, and as a speaker for Gilead and Abbvie. MBr: Speakers Bureau for AbbVie and Gilead. Advisory for AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, Roche, EISAI-MSD. NI: There are no financial disclosures for this author. QN: Has served as a consultant for BMS, GSK, MSD, and Novartis. SHA: Has acted as advisors and investigator for Gilead, Janssen, AbbVie, Roche, Assembly Biosciences, Arbutus, Brii, Vaccitech, GSK, Inovio, Aligos, Vir Biotechnology, SL Vaxigen, GeneOne Life Science, GreenCross, Yuhan, Samil and Ildong. SF: Has received research support from Gilead. Consultant for Abbvie, Assembly Bio, Janssen, and Gilead. Teacher and speaking for Abbvie and Gilead. SGL: Speakers bureau for Gilead, Janssen, Roche, Sysmex. Advisory board for Gilead, Abbott, Roche, GSK, Janssen, Sysmex, Springbank, Arbutus, Assembly, Grifols, Eisai. Research support from Gilead, Abbott, Roche, Sysmex, Fibronostics, Merck. TTC: There are no financial disclosures for this author. WLC: Member of Advisory Board for Gilead, AbbVie, BMS, Roche, and PharmaEssentia. Speaker for Gilead, AbbVie, BMS, Roche, PharmaEssentia. WKS: Received speaker’s fees from Mylan and AstraZeneca, is an advisory board member of Abbott, is an advisory board member and received speaker’s fees from AbbVie, and is an advisory board member, received speaker’s fees and research funding from Gilead Sciences. YSL: Advisor/consultant/speaker for AbbVie, Assembly Biosciences, Bayer Healthcare, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Olix Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Vaccitech, and Vir Biotechnology; and received grant/research support from Gilead Sciences. Please refer to the accompanying ICMJE disclosure forms for further details., (© 2023 The Author(s).)