File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Mortality in patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with tenofovir or entecavir: A multinational study

TitleMortality in patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with tenofovir or entecavir: A multinational study
Authors
Keywordsantigen
antiviral
cohort
ETV
fibrosis
hepatocellular carcinoma
liver
NA
prognosis
TDF
Issue Date13-Mar-2024
PublisherWiley
Citation
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2024 How to Cite?
Abstract

Background and aim: The benefits of entecavir (ETV) versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in reducing the development of chronic hepatitis B (CHB)-related hepatocellular carcinoma remain controversial. Whether mortality rates differ between patients with CHB treated with ETV and those treated with TDF is unclear.

Methods: A total of 2542 patients with CHB treated with either ETV or TDF were recruited from a multinational cohort. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed to balance the differences in baseline characteristics between the two patient groups. We aimed to compare the all-cause, liver-related, and non-liver-related mortality between patients receiving ETV and those receiving TDF.

Results: The annual incidence of all-cause mortality in the entire cohort was 1.0/100 person-years (follow-up, 15 757.5 person-years). Patients who received TDF were younger and had a higher body mass index, platelet count, hepatitis B virus deoxyribonucleic acid levels, and proportion of hepatitis B e-antigen seropositivity than those who received ETV. The factors associated with all-cause mortality were fibrosis-4 index > 6.5 (hazard ratio [HR]/confidence interval [CI]: 3.13/2.15-4.54, P < 0.001), age per year increase (HR/CI: 1.05/1.04-1.07, P < 0.001), alanine aminotransferase level per U/L increase (HR/CI: 0.997/0.996-0.999, P = 0.003), and γ-glutamyl transferase level per U/L increase (HR/CI: 1.002/1.001-1.003, P < 0.001). No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the ETV and TDF groups (log-rank test, P = 0.69). After propensity score matching, no significant differences in all-cause, liver-related, or non-liver-related mortality were observed between the two groups.

Conclusions: Long-term outcomes of all-cause mortality and liver-related and non-liver-related mortality did not differ between patients treated with ETV and those receiving TDF.

Keywords: ETV; NA; TDF; antigen; antiviral; cohort; fibrosis; hepatocellular carcinoma; liver; prognosis.


Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/342035
ISSN
2021 Impact Factor: 4.369
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.214

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorJang, TY-
dc.contributor.authorLiang, PC-
dc.contributor.authorJun, DW-
dc.contributor.authorJung, JH-
dc.contributor.authorToyoda, H-
dc.contributor.authorWang, CW-
dc.contributor.authorYuen, MF-
dc.contributor.authorCheung, KS-
dc.contributor.authorYasuda, S-
dc.contributor.authorKim, SE-
dc.contributor.authorYoon, EL-
dc.contributor.authorAn, JHY-
dc.contributor.authorEnomoto, M-
dc.contributor.authorKozuka, R-
dc.contributor.authorChuma, M-
dc.contributor.authorNozaki, A-
dc.contributor.authorIshikawa, T-
dc.contributor.authorWatanabe, T-
dc.contributor.authorAtsukawa, M-
dc.contributor.authorArai, T-
dc.contributor.authorHayama, K-
dc.contributor.authorIshigami, M-
dc.contributor.authorCho, YK-
dc.contributor.authorOgawa, E-
dc.contributor.authorKim, HS-
dc.contributor.authorShim, JJ-
dc.contributor.authorUojima, H-
dc.contributor.authorJeong, SW-
dc.contributor.authorAhn, SB-
dc.contributor.authorTakaguchi, K-
dc.contributor.authorSenoh, T-
dc.contributor.authorButi, M-
dc.contributor.authorElena, VAI-
dc.contributor.authorAbe, H-
dc.contributor.authorTakahashi, H-
dc.contributor.authorInoue, K-
dc.contributor.authorYeh, ML-
dc.contributor.authorDai, CY-
dc.contributor.authorHuang, JF-
dc.contributor.authorHuang, CF-
dc.contributor.authorChuang, WL-
dc.contributor.authorNguyen, MH-
dc.contributor.authorYu, ML-
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-26T05:39:12Z-
dc.date.available2024-03-26T05:39:12Z-
dc.date.issued2024-03-13-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2024-
dc.identifier.issn0815-9319-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/342035-
dc.description.abstract<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>The benefits of entecavir (ETV) versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in reducing the development of chronic hepatitis B (CHB)-related hepatocellular carcinoma remain controversial. Whether mortality rates differ between patients with CHB treated with ETV and those treated with TDF is unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 2542 patients with CHB treated with either ETV or TDF were recruited from a multinational cohort. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed to balance the differences in baseline characteristics between the two patient groups. We aimed to compare the all-cause, liver-related, and non-liver-related mortality between patients receiving ETV and those receiving TDF.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The annual incidence of all-cause mortality in the entire cohort was 1.0/100 person-years (follow-up, 15 757.5 person-years). Patients who received TDF were younger and had a higher body mass index, platelet count, hepatitis B virus deoxyribonucleic acid levels, and proportion of hepatitis B e-antigen seropositivity than those who received ETV. The factors associated with all-cause mortality were fibrosis-4 index > 6.5 (hazard ratio [HR]/confidence interval [CI]: 3.13/2.15-4.54, P < 0.001), age per year increase (HR/CI: 1.05/1.04-1.07, P < 0.001), alanine aminotransferase level per U/L increase (HR/CI: 0.997/0.996-0.999, P = 0.003), and γ-glutamyl transferase level per U/L increase (HR/CI: 1.002/1.001-1.003, P < 0.001). No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the ETV and TDF groups (log-rank test, P = 0.69). After propensity score matching, no significant differences in all-cause, liver-related, or non-liver-related mortality were observed between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Long-term outcomes of all-cause mortality and liver-related and non-liver-related mortality did not differ between patients treated with ETV and those receiving TDF.</p><p><strong>Keywords: </strong>ETV; NA; TDF; antigen; antiviral; cohort; fibrosis; hepatocellular carcinoma; liver; prognosis.</p>-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherWiley-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectantigen-
dc.subjectantiviral-
dc.subjectcohort-
dc.subjectETV-
dc.subjectfibrosis-
dc.subjecthepatocellular carcinoma-
dc.subjectliver-
dc.subjectNA-
dc.subjectprognosis-
dc.subjectTDF-
dc.titleMortality in patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with tenofovir or entecavir: A multinational study-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jgh.16537-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85188091331-
dc.identifier.eissn1440-1746-
dc.identifier.issnl0815-9319-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats