Open AccessEntecavir vs Tenofovir in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Prevention in Chronic Hepatitis B Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Author(s) -
Ka Shing Cheung,
LungYi Mak,
Sze Hang Liu,
Ho Ming Cheng,
Wai Kay Seto,
Ching Lung Lai
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
clinical and translational gastroenterology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.673
H-Index - 35
ISSN - 2155-384X
DOI - 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000236
Subject(s) - medicine , entecavir , hepatocellular carcinoma , hazard ratio , meta analysis , cochrane library , cohort study , confidence interval , retrospective cohort study , prospective cohort study , hepatitis b , tenofovir , gastroenterology , chronic hepatitis , immunology , human immunodeficiency virus (hiv) , virus , lamivudine
Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) are recommended as first-line therapies for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) infection. Although both drugs reduce hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk, their comparative effectiveness remains controversial. We aimed to determine whether TDF is superior to ETV in preventing HCC. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception until June 9, 2020, were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Key terms included entecavir, tenofovir, and hepatocellular carcinoma. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled using a random effects model. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed by the Cochran Q test and I 2 . RESULTS: Thirteen observational studies (4 of which were conference abstracts) were included with 85,008 patients with CHB (ETV: 56,346; TDF: 28,662). TDF was associated with a lower HCC risk (adjusted HR [aHR]: 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67–0.99). This beneficial effect was present in cirrhotic patients (aHR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.62–0.85) and retrospective cohort studies using electronic data sets (aHR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.51–0.78). However, this beneficial effect did not reach statistical significance for noncirrhotic patients (aHR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.51–1.35) and retrospective/prospective cohort studies using clinical records (aHR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.80–1.18). DISCUSSION: TDF was associated with a lower HCC risk compared with ETV among patients with CHB, particularly cirrhotic patients. Further prospective large-scale studies with longer follow-up periods were required to identify specific subgroups that will benefit most from TDF.