Abstract
Background
Nucleoside analogues are currently applied as a first-line treatment for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients. However, the long-term effects of this type of treatment on kidney and bone tissue need to be further investigated.
Methods
We conducted a search of entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF) for treatment of CHB patients through October 29, 2023. Side effects of the three drugs were compared. Standardized mean difference (SMD), 95% confidence interval (95%CI), and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) were reported for each outcome. Further subgroup analysis was conducted according to duration of administration.
Results
ETV and TAF exhibited less effect on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) than TDF (SMD = -3.60 (95%CI: -1.94 ~ -5.26) and SMD = -4.27 (95%CI: -2.62 ~ -5.93)). ETV also exhibited less effect on creatinine rise than TAF and TDF (SMD = -0.55 (95%CI: -0.09 ~ -1.01) and SMD = -0.61 (95%CI: -0.15 ~ -1.06)). Moreover, the effect of TAF on bone mineral density (BMD) was less than that of TDF (SMD = -0.02 (95%CI: -0.01 ~ -0.02)). The probabilities of the three drugs changing relevant indicators exhibited similar patterns: eGFR (TDF (100.0%) > ETV (41.2%) > TAF (8.8%)), creatinine (TDF (94.7%) > TAF (54.7%) > ETV (0.6%)), BMD (TDF (79.7%) > ETV (50.6%) > TAF (19.6%)), and blood phosphorus (TDF (90.6%) > TAF (49.8%) > ETV (9.7%)). After 6 and 24 months of treatment, no statistically significant difference in renal function or bone tissue was observed between ETV and TDF. However, greater adverse effects on renal function were observed for TDF than ETV at 60 months compared to 12 months. TDF also exhibited greater adverse effects on bone tissue than ETV at 36 months than at 12 months.
Conclusions
Long-term administration of TDF has resulted in stronger adverse effects than TAF and ETV in regard to both renal function and bone tissue in CHB patients. The effect of TAF on creatinine increase was greater than ETV. The difference in side effects between ETV and TDF was independent of treatment duration.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer