Renal Safety of Tenofovir Alafenamide versus Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B Patients: An Evidence-based Case Report
), Kadek Mercu Narapati Pamungkas(2), I Ketut Mariadi(3),
(1) Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University/Prof. IGNG Ngoerah Central General Hospital, Denpasar, Bali
(2) Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University/Prof. IGNG Ngoerah Central General Hospital, Denpasar, Bali
(3) Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Udayana University/Prof. Dr. IGNG Ngoerah Central General Hospital, Denpasar, Bali
Corresponding Author
Abstract
ABSTRACT
Background: Treatment modalities for chronic hepatitis B infection (CHB) are interferon and antiviral. The most commonly used antiviral is tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), however it is known to have nephrotoxicity. Recently, a new antiviral tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) has been developed, which also inhibits hepatitis B virus (HBV). This study aimed to compare the renal safety of TAF and TDF.
Method: Literature searching was conducted in PubMed/Medline and Cochrane databases, with modified keywords as “chronic hepatitis B”, “tenofovir alafenamide”, “tenofovir disoproxil fumarate”, “renal” with BOOLEAN logic. The articles obtained will be selected and will be carried out for critical appraisal about validity, importance, and applicability.
Results: Four studies of double-blind randomized-clinical trials (RCT) were obtained for analysis. The antiviral effects of TAF and TDF groups were not significantly different. The increase in serum creatinine of TAF group was significantly smaller than TDF group in three studies (p < 0.05). While one study showed no significant difference (p = 0.32). The decrease in eGFR (estimated-Glomerular Filtration Rate) in the TAF group was smaller than TDF in three studies (p <0.001), whereas one study found an increase in eGFR in the TAF group (p = 0.00034). There were no severe side effects found in both study groups.
Conclusion: Based on the scientific evidence obtained, TAF has more renal safety than TDF. Although the antiviral effect is not significantly different.
Keywords: chronic hepatitis B, tenofovir alafenamide, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, renal function
Keywords
References
Lim JK, Nguyen MH, Kim WR, Gish R, Perumalswami P, Jacobson IM. Prevalence of Chronic Hepatitis B Virus Infection in the United States. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020 ;115(9):1429-1438.
World Health Organization. Guidelines for the prevention, care and treatment of persons with chronic hepatitis B infection. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 2015.
Buti M, Riveiro-Barciela M, Esteban R. Tenofovir Alafenamide Fumarate: A New Tenofovir Prodrug for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B Infection, The Journal of Infectious Diseases 2017;216(8):S792–S796.
Marcellin P, Gane E, Buti M, Afdhal N, Sievert W, Jacobson IM, et al. Regression of cirrhosis during treatment with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for chronic hepatitis B: a 5-year open-label follow-up study. Lancet 2013; 381: 468–75.
Tamuzi JL, Tshimwanga JL, Bulabula ANH, Muyaya LM. Tenofovir Alafenamide versus Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int J Pul & Res Sci 2018; 2(5): 001-0016.
Lok AS, McMahon BJ, Brown RS, Wong JB, Ahmed AT, Farah W, et al. Antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis B viral infection in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hepatology 2016; 63: 284–306.
Liu Y, Mitchell B, Dinh P, Miller MD, Kitrinos KM. Antiviral activity of tenofovir alafenamide against drug-resistant HBV isolates in vitro. Hepatology (Baltimore) 2016; 64:1194A
Lok ASF, McMahon BJ. Chronic hepatitis B. Vol. 45, Hepatology. 2007. 507–539 p.
Buti M, Gane E, Seto WK, Chan HLY, Chuang WL, Stepanova T, et al. Tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for the treatment of patients with HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B virus infection: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Gastroenterol 2016; 1:196–206.
Chan HLY, Fung S, Seto WK, Chuang WL, Chen CY, Kim H, et al. Tenofovir alafenamide versus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for the treatment of HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B virus infection: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Gastroenterol 2016; 1:185–95.
Agarwal K, Brunetto M, Seto WK, Lim YS, Fung S, Marcellin P, et al. 96 weeks treatment of tenofovir alafenamide vs tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for hepatitis B virus infection. Journal of Hepatology. 2018;1-10.
Lampertico P, Buti M, Fung S, Ahn SH, Chuang WL, Tak WY, et al. Switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide in virologically suppressed patients with chronic hepatitis B: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, multicentre non-inferiority study. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2020;1-13.
Markowitz M, Zolopa A, Squires K, Ruane P, Coakley D, Kearney B, et al. Phase I/II study of the pharmacokinetics, safety and antiretroviral activity of tenofovir alafenamide, a new prodrug of the HIV reverse transcriptase inhibitor tenofovir, in HIV-infected adults. J Antimicrob Chemother 2014; 69(5): 1362-1369.
Brouwer WP. Tenofovir alafenamide for hepatitis B: evolution or revolution. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology 2016; 1: 185-196.
Babusis D, Phan TK, Lee WA, Watkins WJ, Ray AS. Mechanism for effective lymphoid cell and tissue loading following oral administration of nucleotide prodrug GS-7340. Mol Pharm 2013; 10:459–66.
Article Metrics
Abstract View
: 86 times
Download : 50 times
DOI: 10.24871/2522024368
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
