We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial, Phase III
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
96 weeks treatment of tenofovir alafenamide vs. tenofovir disoproxil fumarate for hepatitis B virus infection.
Journal of Hepatology 2018 April
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is a new prodrug of tenofovir developed to treat patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection at a lower dose than tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) through more efficient delivery of tenofovir to hepatocytes. In 48-week results from two ongoing, double-blind, randomized phase III trials, TAF was non-inferior to TDF in efficacy with improved renal and bone safety. We report 96-week outcomes for both trials.
METHODS: In two international trials, patients with chronic HBV infection were randomized 2:1 to receive 25 mg TAF or 300 mg TDF in a double-blinded fashion. One study enrolled HBeAg-positive patients and the other HBeAg-negative patients. We assessed efficacy in each study, and safety in the pooled population.
RESULTS: At week 96, the differences in the rates of viral suppression were similar in HBeAg-positive patients receiving TAF and TDF (73% vs. 75%, respectively, adjusted difference -2.2% (95% CI -8.3 to 3.9%; p = 0.47), and in HBeAg-negative patients receiving TAF and TDF (90% vs. 91%, respectively, adjusted difference -0.6% (95% CI -7.0 to 5.8%; p = 0.84). In both studies the proportions of patients with alanine aminotransferase above the upper limit of normal at baseline, who had normal alanine aminotransferase at week 96 of treatment, were significantly higher in patients receiving TAF than in those receiving TDF. In the pooled safety population, patients receiving TAF had significantly smaller decreases in bone mineral density than those receiving TDF in the hip (mean % change -0.33% vs. -2.51%; p <0.001) and lumbar spine (mean % change -0.75% vs. -2.57%; p <0.001), as well as a significantly smaller median change in estimated glomerular filtration rate by Cockcroft-Gault method (-1.2 vs. -4.8 mg/dl; p <0.001).
CONCLUSION: In patients with HBV infection, TAF remained as effective as TDF, with continued improved renal and bone safety, two years after the initiation of treatment. Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT01940471 and NCT01940341.
LAY SUMMARY: At week 96 of two ongoing studies comparing the efficacy and safety of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B patients, TAF continues to be as effective as TDF with continued improved renal and bone safety. Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT01940471 and NCT01940341.
METHODS: In two international trials, patients with chronic HBV infection were randomized 2:1 to receive 25 mg TAF or 300 mg TDF in a double-blinded fashion. One study enrolled HBeAg-positive patients and the other HBeAg-negative patients. We assessed efficacy in each study, and safety in the pooled population.
RESULTS: At week 96, the differences in the rates of viral suppression were similar in HBeAg-positive patients receiving TAF and TDF (73% vs. 75%, respectively, adjusted difference -2.2% (95% CI -8.3 to 3.9%; p = 0.47), and in HBeAg-negative patients receiving TAF and TDF (90% vs. 91%, respectively, adjusted difference -0.6% (95% CI -7.0 to 5.8%; p = 0.84). In both studies the proportions of patients with alanine aminotransferase above the upper limit of normal at baseline, who had normal alanine aminotransferase at week 96 of treatment, were significantly higher in patients receiving TAF than in those receiving TDF. In the pooled safety population, patients receiving TAF had significantly smaller decreases in bone mineral density than those receiving TDF in the hip (mean % change -0.33% vs. -2.51%; p <0.001) and lumbar spine (mean % change -0.75% vs. -2.57%; p <0.001), as well as a significantly smaller median change in estimated glomerular filtration rate by Cockcroft-Gault method (-1.2 vs. -4.8 mg/dl; p <0.001).
CONCLUSION: In patients with HBV infection, TAF remained as effective as TDF, with continued improved renal and bone safety, two years after the initiation of treatment. Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT01940471 and NCT01940341.
LAY SUMMARY: At week 96 of two ongoing studies comparing the efficacy and safety of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B patients, TAF continues to be as effective as TDF with continued improved renal and bone safety. Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT01940471 and NCT01940341.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app