Switching to tenofovir alafenamide versus continued therapy in chronic hepatitis B patients who were treated with entecavir: A prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUNDS: Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF) have been used widely to treat patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, but it is still unclear how best to use these drugs. Although some studies compared the efficacies of treatment switch from ETV to TAF, there has been no randomized study.

METHODS

We performed a prospective multicenter randomized controlled study in which subjects were enrolled from April 2018 to June 2019 and observed for 2 years until March 2021 to clarify the efficacy and safety of switching from ETV to TAF.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients were enrolled and randomized into 2 groups, and a total of 30 patients were evaluated; a TAF-switching group (n = 16) and an ETV-continuing group (n = 14). The mean age of the 30 patients was 61 years old and 18 patients (60%) were male. The serum HBV DNA in all patients were below detection limit. The mean change in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) levels after 2 years was not significantly different between the TAF and ETV groups (-0.08 vs -0.20 log IU/mL, P = .07). Comparing the group with a HBsAg decline (≤ -0.1 log IU/mL) and a group without a HBsAg decline in an overall analysis, the prior ETV duration was significantly shorter in the HBsAg-declined group (49 vs 92 months, P = .03). Although the eGFR levels tended to decrease in the TAF group compared to ETV (-6.15 vs -2.26 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = .09), no significant differences were observed in patients with baseline eGFR < 60 (-2.49 vs 0.40 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = .25).

CONCLUSION

The efficacy and safety were comparable in the TAF-switching group and the ETV-continuing group. Because the present study was conducted in limited patients, a larger study will be required.