Cargando…

Tenofovir vs Entecavir Among Patients With HBV-Related HCC After Resection

IMPORTANCE: Tenofovir disoproxil and entecavir are both commonly used first-line antiviral treatments, but their comparative recurrence and overall survival (OS) benefits remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To explore differences of tenofovir disoproxil vs entecavir in recurrence-free survival (RFS) and OS a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Pengpeng, Wang, Yuanyuan, Yu, Jian, Yu, Judian, Tao, Qifei, Zhang, Jinwei, Lau, Wan Yee, Zhou, Weiping, Huang, Gang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Medical Association 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10618847/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37906195
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.40353
_version_ 1785129864982953984
author Li, Pengpeng
Wang, Yuanyuan
Yu, Jian
Yu, Judian
Tao, Qifei
Zhang, Jinwei
Lau, Wan Yee
Zhou, Weiping
Huang, Gang
author_facet Li, Pengpeng
Wang, Yuanyuan
Yu, Jian
Yu, Judian
Tao, Qifei
Zhang, Jinwei
Lau, Wan Yee
Zhou, Weiping
Huang, Gang
author_sort Li, Pengpeng
collection PubMed
description IMPORTANCE: Tenofovir disoproxil and entecavir are both commonly used first-line antiviral treatments, but their comparative recurrence and overall survival (OS) benefits remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To explore differences of tenofovir disoproxil vs entecavir in recurrence-free survival (RFS) and OS after liver resection with curative intent in patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) related to hepatitis B virus (HBV). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, a tertiary referral hospital in Shanghai, China, between January 4, 2015, and April 1, 2023. Participants included patients with HBV-related HCC who underwent liver resection with curative intent from January 2015 to December 2018. Patients who received tenofovir disoproxil were matched with patients who received entecavir in a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching. Data were analyzed from April 3 to May 31, 2023. EXPOSURES: Receiving tenofovir disoproxil or entecavir as antiviral treatment for HBV. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary end points were RFS and OS rates. RESULTS: Among 4451 patients (mean [SD] age, 58.1 [10.0] years; 3764 male [84.6%]; median [range] follow-up, of 51 [3 to 91] months), 989 patients in each of the groups were selected in propensity score matching. Baseline characteristics were comparable. In propensity score–matched groups, OS rates were 92.2% at 1 year, 70.9% at 3 years, and 54.2% at 5 years in the entecavir group, compared with 90.9% at 1 year, 75.2% at 3 years, and 64.0% at 5 years in the tenofovir disoproxil group. RFS rates were 83.9% at 1 year, 50.0% at 3 years, and 43.3% at 5 years in the entecavir group, compared with 85.3% at 1 year, 55.6% at 3 years, and 51.4% at 5 years in the tenofovir disoproxil group. Patients in the tenofovir disoproxil group had better OS (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94; P = .004) and RFS rates (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.92; P = .001) compared with the entecavir group. Restricted mean survival time differences of entecavir vs tenofovir disoproxil groups were −0.05 (95% CI, −0.18 to 0.08) months at 1 year (P = .45), 0.20 (95% CI, −0.62 to 1.03) months at 3 years (P = .63), and 1.82 (95% CI, 0.14 to 3.51) months at 5 years (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that in patients undergoing curative liver resection for HBV-related HCC, tenofovir disoproxil was associated with better long-term OS and RFS rates compared with entecavir, providing insights for antiviral treatment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10618847
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher American Medical Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106188472023-11-02 Tenofovir vs Entecavir Among Patients With HBV-Related HCC After Resection Li, Pengpeng Wang, Yuanyuan Yu, Jian Yu, Judian Tao, Qifei Zhang, Jinwei Lau, Wan Yee Zhou, Weiping Huang, Gang JAMA Netw Open Original Investigation IMPORTANCE: Tenofovir disoproxil and entecavir are both commonly used first-line antiviral treatments, but their comparative recurrence and overall survival (OS) benefits remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To explore differences of tenofovir disoproxil vs entecavir in recurrence-free survival (RFS) and OS after liver resection with curative intent in patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) related to hepatitis B virus (HBV). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, a tertiary referral hospital in Shanghai, China, between January 4, 2015, and April 1, 2023. Participants included patients with HBV-related HCC who underwent liver resection with curative intent from January 2015 to December 2018. Patients who received tenofovir disoproxil were matched with patients who received entecavir in a 1:1 ratio using propensity score matching. Data were analyzed from April 3 to May 31, 2023. EXPOSURES: Receiving tenofovir disoproxil or entecavir as antiviral treatment for HBV. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary end points were RFS and OS rates. RESULTS: Among 4451 patients (mean [SD] age, 58.1 [10.0] years; 3764 male [84.6%]; median [range] follow-up, of 51 [3 to 91] months), 989 patients in each of the groups were selected in propensity score matching. Baseline characteristics were comparable. In propensity score–matched groups, OS rates were 92.2% at 1 year, 70.9% at 3 years, and 54.2% at 5 years in the entecavir group, compared with 90.9% at 1 year, 75.2% at 3 years, and 64.0% at 5 years in the tenofovir disoproxil group. RFS rates were 83.9% at 1 year, 50.0% at 3 years, and 43.3% at 5 years in the entecavir group, compared with 85.3% at 1 year, 55.6% at 3 years, and 51.4% at 5 years in the tenofovir disoproxil group. Patients in the tenofovir disoproxil group had better OS (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94; P = .004) and RFS rates (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.92; P = .001) compared with the entecavir group. Restricted mean survival time differences of entecavir vs tenofovir disoproxil groups were −0.05 (95% CI, −0.18 to 0.08) months at 1 year (P = .45), 0.20 (95% CI, −0.62 to 1.03) months at 3 years (P = .63), and 1.82 (95% CI, 0.14 to 3.51) months at 5 years (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that in patients undergoing curative liver resection for HBV-related HCC, tenofovir disoproxil was associated with better long-term OS and RFS rates compared with entecavir, providing insights for antiviral treatment. American Medical Association 2023-10-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10618847/ /pubmed/37906195 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.40353 Text en Copyright 2023 Li P et al. JAMA Network Open. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Li, Pengpeng
Wang, Yuanyuan
Yu, Jian
Yu, Judian
Tao, Qifei
Zhang, Jinwei
Lau, Wan Yee
Zhou, Weiping
Huang, Gang
Tenofovir vs Entecavir Among Patients With HBV-Related HCC After Resection
title Tenofovir vs Entecavir Among Patients With HBV-Related HCC After Resection
title_full Tenofovir vs Entecavir Among Patients With HBV-Related HCC After Resection
title_fullStr Tenofovir vs Entecavir Among Patients With HBV-Related HCC After Resection
title_full_unstemmed Tenofovir vs Entecavir Among Patients With HBV-Related HCC After Resection
title_short Tenofovir vs Entecavir Among Patients With HBV-Related HCC After Resection
title_sort tenofovir vs entecavir among patients with hbv-related hcc after resection
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10618847/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37906195
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.40353
work_keys_str_mv AT lipengpeng tenofovirvsentecaviramongpatientswithhbvrelatedhccafterresection
AT wangyuanyuan tenofovirvsentecaviramongpatientswithhbvrelatedhccafterresection
AT yujian tenofovirvsentecaviramongpatientswithhbvrelatedhccafterresection
AT yujudian tenofovirvsentecaviramongpatientswithhbvrelatedhccafterresection
AT taoqifei tenofovirvsentecaviramongpatientswithhbvrelatedhccafterresection
AT zhangjinwei tenofovirvsentecaviramongpatientswithhbvrelatedhccafterresection
AT lauwanyee tenofovirvsentecaviramongpatientswithhbvrelatedhccafterresection
AT zhouweiping tenofovirvsentecaviramongpatientswithhbvrelatedhccafterresection
AT huanggang tenofovirvsentecaviramongpatientswithhbvrelatedhccafterresection