Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Partial Response to Entecavir and Tenofovir in Naïve Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B: Clinical Relevance and Management

  • Hepatitis B: Therapeutics (P Martin, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Hepatitis Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Entecavir and tenofovir are the currently recommended first line analogues for treatment of naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B. Despite their overall efficacy and high genetic barrier granting for a low risk of resistance, both regimens will fail to completely suppress HBV DNA at week 48 in 10% of HBeAg-negative and 30% of HBeAg-positive patients. A pre-treatment level >8 log10 IU/mL HBV DNA and poor medication adherence were the most significant predictors of a partial virological response (PVR). While the clinical relevance of PVR is still poorly understood, nucleos(t)ide (NUC)-naive PVR patients who maintained detectable levels of viremia in follow up, were at risk of developing resistance to ETV. Patients with a suboptimal decline of viremia during the first 48 weeks of therapy with ETV and/or a residual viremia >1,000 IU/mL, can be protected by a rescue switch to TDF. Resistance to TDF has not been described so far, yet the long-term risk of PVR in TDF-treated patients remains unclear.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. •• European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL clinical practice guidelines: management of chronic hepatitis B. J Hepatol. 2009;50:227–42. The most recent and update international practice guidelines in the management of patients with chronic hepatitis B.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lok AS, McMahon BJ. Chronic hepatitis B: update 2009. Hepatology. 2009;50:661–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lampertico P. Partial virological response to nucleos(t)ide analogues in naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B: from guidelines to field practice. J Hepatol. 2009;50:644–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Zoulim F, Locarnini S. Hepatitis B virus resistance to nucleos(t)ide analogues. Gastroenterology. 2009;137:1593–608.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chang TT, Gish RG, de Man R, et al. BEHoLD AI463022 study group. A comparison of entecavir and lamivudine for HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1001–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lai CL, Shouval D, Lok AS, et al. Entecavir versus lamivudine for patients with HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1011–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. • Tenney DJ, Rose RE, Baldick CJ, et al. Long-term monitoring shows hepatitis B virus resistance to entecavir in nucleoside-naive patients is rare through 5 years of therapy. Hepatology. 2009;49:1503–14. In this long-term study in NUCs-naïve patients treated with ETV, the 5-year cumulative probability of genotypic ETV-resistance was 1.2%.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Leung N, Peng CY, Hann HW, et al. Early hepatitis B virus DNA reduction in hepatitis B e antigen-positive patients with chronic hepatitis B: a randomized international study of entecavir versus adefovir. Hepatology. 2009;49:72–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. • Liaw YF, Raptopoulou-Gigi M, Cheinquer H, et al. Efficacy and safety of entecavir versus adefovir in chronic hepatitis B patients with hepatic decompensation: a randomized, open-label study. Hepatology. 2011;54:91–100. This randomized, open-label comparative study in subjects with CHB and hepatic decompensation showed that patients treated with ETV had a higher rate of undetectable serum HBV DNA at weeks 48 compared to those treated with ADV.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lampertico P, Viganò M, Facchetti F, et al. Effectiveness and safety of entecavir treatment of nucleos(t)ide-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients: a 4-year multicenter field practice study of 418 patients in Italy. (submitted)

  11. •• Zoutendijk R, Reijnders JG, Brown A, et al. Entecavir treatment for chronic hepatitis B: adaptation is not needed for the majority of naïve patients with a partial virological response. Hepatology. 2011;54:443–51. This study showed that ETV monotherapy can be continued in NUCs-naïve patients with detectable HBV DNA at week 48, particularly in those with a viral load <1,000 IU/mL because long-term ETV leads to a virological response in the vast majority of those patients.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Chon YE, Kim SU, Lee CK, et al. Partial virological response to entecavir in treatment-naive patients with chronic hepatitis B. Antivir Ther. 2011;16:469–77.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Lok AS, Trinh HN, Carosi G, et al. Entecavir (ETV) monotherapy for 96 weeks is comparable to combination therapy with ETV plus tenofovir (TDF) in nucleos(t)ide-naive patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB): the below study. Hepatology. 2011;54:471A.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lee JM, Ahn SH, Kim HS, et al. Quantitative hepatitis B surface antigen and hepatitis B e antigen titers in prediction of treatment response to entecavir. Hepatology. 2011;53:1486–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ha NB, Ha NB, Garcia RT, et al. Medication nonadherence with long-term management of patients with hepatitis B e antigen-negative chronic hepatitis B. Dig Dis Sci. 2011;56:2423–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Suzuki F, Akuta N, Suzuki Y, et al. Selection of a virus strain resistant to entecavir in a nucleoside-naıve patient with hepatitis B of genotype H. J Clin Virol. 2007;39:149–52.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Guo JJ, Li QL, Shic XF, et al. Dynamics of hepatitis B virus resistance to entecavir in a nucleoside/nucleotide-naıve patient. Antiviral Res. 2009;81:180–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kobashi H, Fujioka S, Kawaguchi M, et al. Two cases of development of entecavir resistance during entecavir treatment for nucleoside-naive chronic hepatitis B. Hepatol Int. 2009;3:403–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Yuen MF, Seto WK, Fung J, et al. Three years of continuous entecavir therapy in treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients: viral suppression, viral resistance, and clinical safety. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:1264–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. •• Marcellin P, Heathcote EJ, Buti M, et al. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus adefovir dipivoxil for chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2442–55. In this large multinational trial in chronic hepatitis B patients, TDF at a daily dose of 300 mg had superior antiviral efficacy with a similar safety profile as compared with ADV at a daily dose of 10 mg through week 48.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Marcellin P, Heathcote EJ, Corsa A, et al. No detectable resistance to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) following 240 weeks of treatment in patients with HBeAg + and HBeAg- chronic hepatitis B virus infection. Hepatology. 2011;54:480A.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Liaw YF, Sheen IS, Lee CM, et al. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), emtricitabine/TDF, and entecavir in patients with decompensated chronic hepatitis B liver disease. Hepatology. 2011;53:62–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Lampertico P, Soffredini R, Viganò M, et al. 2-year effectiveness and safety of tenofovir in 302 NUC-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis B: a multicenter European study in clinical practice. Hepatology. 2011;54:1041A.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Carey I, Nguyen HL, Joe D, et al. De-novo antiviral therapy with nucleos(t)ide analogues in “real-life” patients with chronic hepatitis B infection: comparison of virological response between lamivudine + adefovir vs entecavir vs tenofovir therapy. Hepatology. 2011;54:1022A.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Pan C, Hu K, Yu AS, et al. Response to tenofovir monotherapy in chronic hepatitis B patients with prior suboptimal response to entecavir. J Viral Hep 2011, in press

  26. Sarrecchia C, Svicher V, Volpi A, et al. Successful switch to tenofovir after suboptimal response to entecavir in an immunocompromised patient with chronic hepatitis B and without genotypic hepatitis B virus resistance. Infection. 2011;39:367–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

Dr. M. Colombo has received grant support from Merck, Roche, BMS, and Gilead Science, payment for development of educational presentations and travel and accommodation reimbursement from Tibotec, Roche, Novartis, Bayer, BMS, Gilead Science and Vertex; Dr. P. Lampertico has received payment for development of educational presentations and travel and accommodation reimbursement from GSK, Gilead, BMS, and Roche; Dr. M. Viganò reported no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1st Division of Gastroenterology, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda—Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Università di Milano, Via Francesco Sforza 35, 20122, Milan, Italy

    Pietro Lampertico & Massimo Colombo

  2. Hepatology Unit, Ospedale San Giuseppe, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy

    Mauro Viganò

Authors
  1. Pietro Lampertico
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mauro Viganò
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Massimo Colombo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pietro Lampertico.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lampertico, P., Viganò, M. & Colombo, M. Partial Response to Entecavir and Tenofovir in Naïve Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B: Clinical Relevance and Management. Curr Hepatitis Rep 11, 90–94 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11901-012-0127-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11901-012-0127-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation