Journals / Infectious diseases and clinical microbiology (Online) / 2022 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1

Evaluation of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Treatment in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B

Pages
47–54
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: As a result of our study, TDF was an effective and well-tolerated choice for CHB treatment.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The main purpose of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) treatment is to improve the patients’ life quality and prevent the disease from progressing to cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study aimed to evaluate the CHB patients retrospectively followed up with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) treatment.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: As a result of our study, TDF was an effective and well-tolerated choice for CHB treatment.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2001 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The main purpose of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) treatment is to improve the patients’ life quality and prevent the disease from progressing to cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma. Continuous suppression of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA with nucleoside or nucleotide analogues is the most critical way to achieve this goal. This study aimed to evaluate the CHB patients retrospectively followed up with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) treatment. Materials and Methods: The study was planned as retrospective research by Afyonkarahisar Health Sciences University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology between January 2001 and December 2020. We evaluated all treatmentnaive and treatment-experienced patients who received TDF (245 mg/day) treatment with the diagnosis of CHB. The data were obtained by reviewing the file information registered in the hospital automation system. HBsAg, Anti-HBs, HBeAg, Anti-HBe, HBV DNA, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) values of the patients were evaluated at 1st, 3rd, 6th, 12th months, and 6-month follow-ups throughout the treatment. Virological (HBV-DNA of 40 IU/ml) and serological (Anti-HBe seroconversion in HBeAg positives and HBsAg negative and anti-HBs seroconversion in all patients) responses were examined. Adverse effects were also assessed during the treatment. Results: Data from 131 patients who received TDF treatment were evaluated. Virological responses were determined as 78.6%, 81.3%, 94.2%, and 100% in the patients at 24th week, 48th week, 4th year, and 8th year, respectively. While there was no Anti-HBs seroconversion in any patients in four years of the treatment, it was observed at a rate of 10.5% in the eighth year. We did not determine any significant adverse effects requiring discontinuation of the treatment in the long-term follow-up of 131 patients under TDF treatment. Conclusion: As a result of our study, TDF was an effective and well-tolerated choice for CHB treatment.

🔖

Cite This Article

KONYA, P., DEMİRTÜRK, N. (2022). Evaluation of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Treatment in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B. Infectious diseases and clinical microbiology (Online), Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 1, 47–54. https://ajindex.com/articles/539058

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. 1 Hepatitis B [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization (WHO). (July 27, 2021
  2. cited August 22, 2021) Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/hepatitis-b Doganay L. Host genetic factors affecting hepatitis B infection outcomes: Insights 2 Akcay IM, Katrinli S, Ozdil K, Doganay GD, from genome-wide association studies.World J Gastroenterol. 2018
  3. 24(30):3347-60. [CrossRef] 3 Ozaras R, Mete B, Ceylan B, Ozgunes N, Gunduz A, Karaosmanoglu H, et al. First-line monotherapies of tenofovir and entecavir have comparable efficacies in hepatitis B treatment. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014
  4. 26(7):774-80. [CrossRef] 4 Kayaaslan B, Akinci E, Ari A, Tufan ZK, Alpat SN, Gunal O, et al. A long-term multicenter study: entecavir versus tenofovir in treatment of nucleos(t)ide analogue-naive chronic hepatitis B patients. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2018
  5. 42(1):40-7. [CrossRef] 5 Buti M, Riveiro-Barciela M, Esteban R. Long-term safety and efficacy of nucleo(t)side analogue therapy in hepatitis B. Liver Int. 2018
  6. 38 Suppl 1:84-9. [CrossRef] 6 Terrault NA, Bzowej NH, Chang KM, Hwang JP, Jonas MM, Murad MH
  7. American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. AASLD guidelines for treatment of chronic hepatitis B. Hepatology. 2016
  8. 63(1):261-83. [CrossRef] 7 European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL 2017 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the management of hepatitis B virus infection. J Hepatol. 2017
  9. 67(2):370-98. [CrossRef] 8 Lok AS, McMahon BJ. Chronic hepatitis B. Hepatology. 2007
  10. 45(2):507-39. Erratum in: Hepatology. 2007
  11. 45(6):1347. [CrossRef] 9 Batirel A, Guclu E, Arslan F, Kocak F, Karabay O, Ozer S, et al. Comparable efficacy of tenofovir versus entecavir and predictors of response in treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B: a multicenter real-life study. Int J Infect Dis. 2014
  12. [CrossRef] 10 Han Y, Zeng A, Liao H, Liu Y, Chen Y, Ding H. The efficacy and safety comparison between tenofovir and entecavir in treatment of chronic hepatitis B and HBV related cirrhosis: A systematic review and Meta-analysis. Int Immunopharmacol. 2017
  13. [CrossRef] 11 Shim JJ, Kim JW, Oh CH, Lee YR, Lee JS, Park SY, et al. Serum alanine aminotransferase level and liver-related mortality in patients with chronic hepatitis B: A large national cohort study. Liver Int. 2018
  14. 38(10):1751-9. [CrossRef] 12 Buti M, Tsai N, Petersen J, Flisiak R, Gurel S, Krastev Z, et al. Seven-year efficacy and safety of treatment with tenofovir disop