Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2016 Feb;50(2):169-74.
doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000345.

Treatment Outcomes With First-line Therapies With Entecavir and Tenofovir in Treatment-Naive Chronic Hepatitis B Patients in a Routine Clinical Practice

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Treatment Outcomes With First-line Therapies With Entecavir and Tenofovir in Treatment-Naive Chronic Hepatitis B Patients in a Routine Clinical Practice

Nghiem B Ha et al. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2016 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Given their high efficacy, entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir (TDF), are the recommended first-line therapies for chronic hepatitis B, but it is not clear whether the efficacy reported from pivotal trials is similar to the outcomes seen in routine practice.

Goals: Our goal was to examine the treatment outcomes of antiviral therapy in such setting.

Patients and methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 557 consecutive treatment-naive patients who started either ETV (n=443) or TDF (n=114) at 3 US liver clinics between January 2005 and 2012. Primary study endpoint was complete viral suppression (CVS) rate (hepatitis B virus DNA<40 IU/mL).

Results: The majority of patients in both ETV and TDF groups were Asians, hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) negative, male, and with similar pretreatment alanine aminotransferase and hepatitis B virus DNA levels. Similar proportions of patients in the ETV and TDF groups achieved CVS at 24 months: 87.7% versus 87.0%, respectively. Cumulative rates of virological breakthrough in the ETV and TDF groups were 1.0% versus 4.8% (P=0.26) and 3.7% versus 9.8% (P=0.04) at month 12 and 24, respectively; and all were associated with medication nonadherence. Cumulative rate of medication nonadherence was lower in the ETV than TDF group: 4.6% versus 7.8% at month 12 and 8.9% versus 16.9% at month 24, respectively.

Conclusions: Patients treated with either ETV or TDF achieve a similar rate of CVS at 24 months. The primary contributor to suboptimal response was medication nonadherence. Attention to medication adherence is needed in a routine clinical setting.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources