Abstract:INTRODUCTION: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a contagious condition posing a major public health risk in various nations including Vietnam. In 2019, the Ministry of Health introduced tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) to treat patients with chronic HBV infection and reduce the long-term toxicity of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of these two medications in individuals with HBeAg-positive chronic HBV. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included data collected from the medical records of patients with chronic HBV who visited the Liver Clinic at University Medical Center HCMC between 2018 and 2020. RESULTS: After two years of treatment, the proportion of HBeAg loss in the TAF group was twice that of the TDF group (22.4% vs. 11.2%), indicating a statistically significant difference in the probability of HBeAg loss (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.22; 95% CI 1.43 to 3.42; p < 0.01). Additionally, there was a statistically significant difference in the rate and ability of antiviral response between patients treated with TAF and TDF (65% vs. 54.5%, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio = 1.34; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.69; p < 0.01). 93.9% of patients achieved the goal of restoring ALT to normal, a higher percentage compared to the 81.2% in the TDF group, and the likelihood of achieving normal ALT levels with TAF was greater compared to those on TDF (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.67; 95% CI 1.38 to 2.01; p < 0.01). Moreover, there was a statistically significant difference in the variation in renal function between the TAF and TDF groups. Serum creatinine levels in the TAF group increased less than those in the TDF group by 0.03 mg/dL every 6 months (95% CI -0.04 to -0.01, p < 0.01), and the eGFR in the TAF group was higher than that in the TDF group every 6 months by 2.78 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (95% CI 0.98 to 4.57, p < 0.01). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the likelihood of HBeAg seroconversion between chronic hepatitis B patients treated with TAF or TDF (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.79; 95% CI 0.91 to 3.53; p = 0.09), nor in the risk of adverse events between the two groups (adjusted odds ratio = 1.34; 95% CI 0.88 to 2.05; p = 0.17). Additionally, although the HBsAg concentration in the TAF group was lower than in the TDF group by an average of 0.05 log10 IU/mL every 6 months (95% CI -0.15 to 0.05), this difference also did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.35). DISCUSSION: TAF has been demonstrated to achieve some therapeutic efficacy goals and reduce nephrotoxicity better than TDF. However, no differences were found in seroconversion or adverse events between the patient groups.

Risk of hepatocellular carcinoma after curative treatment when switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or entecavir to tenofovir alafenamide: A real‐world multicenter cohort study

Effect of tenofovir alafenamide vs. tenofovir disoproxil fumarate on hepatocellular carcinoma risk in chronic hepatitis B

Tenofovir alafenamide and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate reduce incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B

Tenofovir alafenamide after switching from entecavir or nucleos(t)ide combination therapy for patients with chronic hepatitis B

Impact of switching to tenofovir alafenamide fumarate in patients with entecavir-treated chronic hepatitis B

Tenofovir versus entecavir on recurrence and mortality of hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma after curative therapy

Hepatocellular carcinoma risk in patients with chronic hepatitis B receiving tenofovir-vs. entecavir-based regimens: individual patient data meta-analysis

Switching to tenofovir alafenamide for nucleos(t)ide analogue-experienced patients with chronic hepatitis B: week 144 results from a real-world, multi-centre cohort study

Risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in antiviral treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients treated with entecavir or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate: a network meta-analysis

Tenofovir alafenamide versus entecavir in treating patients with chronic hepatitis B: A meta-analysis

Tenofovir Versus Entecavir for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Prevention in an International Consortium of Chronic Hepatitis B

Long-Term Outcomes after Switching to Tenofovir Alafenamide in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B

Tenofovir Vs. Entecavir on Outcomes of Hepatitis B Virus-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Radiofrequency Ablation

Clinical Efficacy And Safety of Long-Term Treatment Of Tenofovir Alafenamide Vs Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate for Chronic Hepatitis B in Vietnam

Tenofovir is superior to entecavir in reducing HCC for patients with HBV-related compensated cirrhosis at high HCC risk scores

Tenofovir versus entecavir on the prognosis of hepatitis B-related hepatocellular carcinoma after surgical resection: a randomised controlled trial

Tenofovir amibufenamide vs tenofovir alafenamide for treating chronic hepatitis B: A real-world study

Switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide in virologically suppressed patient with chronic hepatitis B

Tenofovir vs. entecavir on recurrence of hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma beyond Milan criteria after hepatectomy

Tenofovir Versus Entecavir on the Prognosis of Hepatitis B Virus-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Tenofovir <i>vs</i>. entecavir on recurrence of hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma beyond Milan criteria after hepatectomy